Re: [PATCH v3 00/10] reset: rework reset-gpios handling

[Philipp Zabel]

On Mi, 2025-10-29 at 13:28 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> Machine GPIO lookup is a nice, if a bit clunky, mechanism when we have
> absolutely no idea what the GPIO provider is or when it will be created.
> However in the case of reset-gpios, we not only know if the chip is
> there - we also already hold a reference to its firmware node.
> 
> In this case using fwnode lookup makes more sense. However, since the
> reset provider is created dynamically, it doesn't have a corresponding
> firmware node (in this case: an OF-node). That leaves us with software
> nodes which currently cannot reference other implementations of the
> fwnode API, only other struct software_node objects. This is a needless
> limitation as it's imaginable that a dynamic auxiliary device (with a
> software node attached) would want to reference a real device with an OF
> node.
> 
> This series does three things: extends the software node implementation,
> allowing its properties to reference not only static software nodes but
> also existing firmware nodes, updates the GPIO property interface to use
> the reworked swnode macros and finally makes the reset-gpio code the
> first user by converting the GPIO lookup from machine to swnode.
> 
> Another user of the software node changes in the future could become the
> shared GPIO modules that's in the works in parallel[1].
> 
> Merging strategy: the series is logically split into three parts: driver
> core, GPIO and reset respectively. However there are build-time
> dependencies between all three parts so I suggest the reset tree as the
> right one to take it upstream with an immutable branch provided to
> driver core and GPIO.

Should that branch include the reset changes, or only up to patch 6?

regards
Philipp