Re: [PATCH 1/2] driver core: provide device_match_fwnode_ext()

[Danilo Krummrich]

On Thu Feb 19, 2026 at 10:18 PM CET, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 20:27:51 +0100, Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
>> On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 05:55:20PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
>>> On Thu Feb 19, 2026 at 5:39 PM CET, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> Also, is there a reason why we need both device_match_fwnode() *and*
>>> device_match_fwnode_ext()?
>>
>> Yes. We don't want (at least for now) to dive into bug hunting in a 2+ years
>> horizon if something goes wrong with [currently] working drivers that use
>> device_match_fwnode() against the cases when there are primary and secondary
>> fwnodes present.
>>
>> I won't put my bet that extending device_match_fwnode() won't break anything.
>> And I don't want to invest (waste?) my time to learn each of the existing cases.
>>
>> The proposed way is robust and safest. And for the record, I will be the first
>> person to push back device_match_fwnode() upgrade without a comprehensive testing
>> on real (affected) HW.
>>
>
> Who's got the final word here? I responded to Danilo's email saying I can fold
> the new code into the existing function but you are against it.

I asked this question because it does not seem unlikely it could just work for
all drivers. (Reading other threads, it seems like I'm not the only one asking
this.)

If someone is up to investigate, why not? If not, that's fine too, then we take
the safe path.

In case of the latter, I suggest to rename it to device_match_fwnode_full().

Thanks,
Danilo