Re: ChipIdea USB regression

[Charles Keepax]

On Sat, Jan 15, 2022 at 09:55:23AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 5:18 AM Charles Keepax
> <ckeepax@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 10:56:20AM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> > So when that patch copies the DT node to the new platform device
> > in ci_hdrc_add_device it copies the compatible stuff as well as
> > the IRQ stuff it was targeting, this presumably causes the kernel
> > to bind a new copy of the driver to that new device, which probes
> > and calls ci_hdrc_add_device again repeating the process until
> > it dies.
> >
> > Kinda looks to me like the best solution might just be to revert
> > the patch, I am not sure I see how that copy of the DT is supposed
> > to work?
> 
> It's not copying the DT, but yes AFAICT it does match and bind the
> child device on the parent driver using the compatible match instead
> of matching on driver name. I think we can use the of_reuse_node flag
> to avoid this in the match, but that needs some more investigation.

Assuming you mean the of_node_reused flag, looks like it already
being set, your code does this:

@@ -864,6 +864,7 @@ struct platform_device *ci_hdrc_add_device(struct device *dev,
	pdev->dev.parent = dev;
	+ device_set_of_node_from_dev(&pdev->dev, dev);

And that function does this:

void device_set_of_node_from_dev(struct device *dev, const struct device *dev2)
{
	of_node_put(dev->of_node);
	dev->of_node = of_node_get(dev2->of_node);
	dev->of_node_reused = true;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(device_set_of_node_from_dev);

I guess maybe that flag doesn't do what it is supposed to for
some reason?

Thanks,
Charles