Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 13/13] platform/x86: intel_cht_int33fe: Replacing the old connections with references | From | Hans de Goede <> | Date | Wed, 17 Apr 2019 12:15:18 +0200 |
| |
Hi,
On 17-04-19 11:32, Heikki Krogerus wrote: > On Wed, Apr 17, 2019 at 11:19:28AM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
<snip>
>> That is not going to work since the (virtual) mux / orientation-switch >> devices are only registered once the driver binds to the piusb30532 i2c >> device, so when creating the nodes we only have the piusb30532 i2c device. > > It's not a problem, that's why we have the software nodes. The nodes > can be created before the device entires. The node for pi3usb30532 > will just be the parent node for the new nodes we add for the mux and > switch. > >> I've been thinking some more about this and an easy fix is to have separate >> fwnode_match functions for typec_switch_match and typec_mux_match and have >> them check that the dev_name ends in "-mux" resp. "-switch" that requires >> only a very minimal change to "usb: typec: Registering real device entries for the muxes" >> and then everything should be fine. > > I don't want to do anymore device name matching unless we have to, and > here we don't have to. We can name the nodes for those virtual mux and > switch, and then just do fwnode_find_named_child_node() in > pi3usb30532.c for both of them.
Thinking more about this, I have a feeling that this makes things needlessly complicated, checking the dev_name *ends* in "-mux" resp. "-switch" should be 100% reliable since we call:
dev_set_name(&sw->dev, "%s-switch", dev_name(parent)); dev_set_name(&mux->dev, "%s-mux", dev_name(parent));
When registering the switch / mux, so I believe doing name (suffix) comparison here is fine and much simpler. Anyways this is just my 2 cents on this, I'm happy with either solution, your choice.
Regards,
Hans
| |