Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 0/4] of: automate of_node_put() - new approach to loops.

[Jonathan Cameron]

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 16:39:42 -0600
Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 25, 2024 at 02:27:10PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> > From: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > Some discussion occured on previous posting.
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/20240223124432.26443-1-Jonathan.Cameron@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > 
> > Summary:
> > * fwnode conversions should be considered when applying this
> >   infrastructure to a driver. Perhaps better to move directly to
> >   the generic FW property handling rather than improve existing
> >   of specific code.
> > * There are lots of potential places to use this based on detections
> >   from Julia's coccinelle scripts linked below.
> > 
> > The equivalent device_for_each_child_node_scoped() series for
> > fwnode will be queued up in IIO for the merge window shortly as
> > it has gathered sufficient tags. Hopefully the precdent set there
> > for the approach will reassure people that instantiating the
> > child variable inside the macro definition is the best approach.
> > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/20240217164249.921878-1-jic23@xxxxxxxxxx/
> > 
> > v2: Andy suggested most of the original converted set should move to
> >     generic fwnode / property.h handling.  Within IIO that was
> >     a reasonable observation given we've been trying to move away from
> >     firmware specific handling for some time. Patches making that change
> >     to appropriate drivers posted.
> >     As we discussed there are cases which are not suitable for such
> >     conversion and this infrastructure still provides clear benefits
> >     for them.
> > 
> > Ideally it would be good if this introductory series adding the
> > infrastructure makes the 6.9 merge window. There are no dependencies
> > on work queued in the IIO tree, so this can go via devicetree
> > if the maintainers would prefer. I've had some off list messages
> > asking when this would be merged, as there is interest in building
> > on it next cycle for other parts of the kernel (where conversion to
> > fwnode handling may be less appropriate).  
> 
> I'll let you take it. For the series:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> I've got some drivers/of/ conversions too, but they are probably next 
> cycle at this point.
> 
> Rob

Thanks Rob,

Whether this makes it for this cycle is probably dependent on whether
Linus does decide to do got to rc8 as hinted at as a possibility
+ whether Greg feels comfortable taking these through his tree
(char-misc is the normal path for IIO).  I know various people
are hoping this series makes it, but if doesn't we can do an immutable
tree early next cycle (though obviously that may reduce speed of adoption).

We are discussing the equivalent pull request for the fwnode version here:

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/2024030239-gift-cabdriver-266b@gregkh/T/#m87e7208820ebf6416a77a2973773b65a087b4796

I've optimistically applied this series to my togreg-cleanup branch
and merged that into the togreg branch of iio.git for linux-next to pick up.

Thanks,

Jonathan