Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] reset: handle RESET_GPIO better to provide the fallback

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 03/11/2025 16:23, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
>> You removed RFC and entire rationale. Your earlier commit - 690de2902dca
>> - is broken. You must not do that.
> 
> Wojciech was told to do exactly what he did. Dunno by whom, I trusted
> that after seeing the handling code in reset core. Is the required
> fallback documented somewhere?

Yes, by stable ABI document and by standard rule - we never break the users.

That commit for which I sent revert effectively breaks that rule -
affects the users.

> 
>> Broken 690de2902dca leads to this broken patchset, but that is not a
>> correct fix. You need to fix the source - revert 690de2902dca, because
>> it is obviously wrong. You MUST ave fallback to reset-gpios, that was
>> the entire concept how this driver was written.
> 
> What is the benefit of having reset-gpios handling in the reset core
> optionally and required as a fallback?

Stable ABI rules require that, it is not about "benefits". Please send
email to Linus and ask him: "can I make a change which breaks users of ABI".


> 
> What is the drawback of having this tiny driver in the core and provide

If you have squashed the patchset, instead of making this non-bisectable
mess, it would be fine. But because you made it non-bisectable and only
one part got to the kernel - ALL USERS are affected and their boards broken.

See four reports from Marek Szyprowski.


Best regards,
Krzysztof