Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 16 Jun 2020 13:30:39 +0000 | From | Charles Keepax <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] mfd: mfd-core: Add mechanism for removal of a subset of children |
| |
On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 02:22:59PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Charles Keepax wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 10:15:45AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > On Tue, 16 Jun 2020, Charles Keepax wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 08:58:34AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 15 Jun 2020, Charles Keepax wrote: > > > > Does this match how you would expect this to be used? > > > > > > No, not at all. > > > > > > > I do have some concerns. The code can't use mfd_get_cell since it > > > > returns a const pointer, although the pointer in platform_device > > > > isn't const so we access that directly, could update mfd_get_cell? We > > > > also don't have access to mfd_dev_type outside of the mfd core so > > > > its hard to check we are actually setting the mfd_cell of actual > > > > MFD children, I guess just checking for mfd_cell being not NULL is > > > > good enough? > > > > > > Hmmm... looks like I missed the fact that you needed additional > > > processing between the removal of each batch of devices. My > > > implementation simply handles the order in which devices are removed > > > (a bit like initcall()s). > > > > > > How about the inclusion of mfd_remove_devices_late(), whereby > > > mfd_remove_devices() will refuse to remove devices tagged with > > > MFD_DEP_LEVEL_HIGH. > > > > > > > Yeah this should work fine for my use-case. > > > > > Not sure why, but I really dislike the idea of device removal by > > > arbitrary value/tag, as I see it spawning all sorts of weird and > > > wonderful implications/hacks/abuse. > > > > > > > Its definitely a spectrum with flexibility covering more > > use-cases but also definitely opening things up to more abuse. If > > you are more comfortable with this approach that is fine with me. > > > > Would you like me to have a crack at coding it up this way? Or > > did you want to do a patch? > > Either/or. I don't want to steal your thunder, but I'm happy to draft > if you are. >
Been having a poke this afternoon as I had some spare time, so will wing that up and you can take over if I am too far off the mark :-)
Thanks, Charles
| |