Re: [PATCH 4/6] Revert "nvmem: add new config option"

[Rafał Miłecki]

On 2023-10-21 19:18, Greg KH wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 11:55:43AM +0100, 
> srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > This reverts commit 517f14d9cf3533d5ab4fded195ab6f80a92e378f.
> >
> > It seems that "no_of_node" config option was added to help mtd's case.
> >
> > DT nodes of MTD partitions (that are also NVMEM devices) may contain
> > subnodes that SHOULD NOT be treated as NVMEM fixed cells. To prevent
> > NVMEM core code from parsing them "no_of_node" was set to true and 
> > that
> > made for_each_child_of_node() in NVMEM a no-op.
> >
> > With the introduction of "add_legacy_fixed_of_cells" config option
> > things got more explicit. MTD subsystem simply tells NVMEM when to 
> > look
> > for fixed cells and there is no need to hack "of_node" pointer 
> > anymore.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Why isn't this also marked for stable trees?

I think it's explained in commit message but maybe it's not clear
enough?

This revert (PATCH 4/6) is possible only with the previous PATCH 2/6
applied first. In other words "no_of_node" config option can be dropped
only after adding "add_legacy_fixed_of_cells" config option.

Since adding "add_legacy_fixed_of_cells" is not a bug/regression fix I
didn't mark it for stable and so I couldn't mark revert for stable.

--
Rafał Miłecki