Now that all users of references have moved to reference properties,
we can remove separate handling of references.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
It is possible to store references to software nodes in the same fashion as
other static properties, so that users do not need to define separate
structures:
static const struct software_node gpio_bank_b_node = {
.name = "B",
};
static const struct property_entry simone_key_enter_props[] = {
PROPERTY_ENTRY_U32("linux,code", KEY_ENTER),
PROPERTY_ENTRY_STRING("label", "enter"),
PROPERTY_ENTRY_REF("gpios", &gpio_bank_b_node, 123, GPIO_ACTIVE_LOW),
{ }
};
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
We should not conflate whether a property data is an array or a single
value with where it is stored (embedded into property_entry structure or
out-of-line). All single-value properties are in effect 1-element
arrays, and we can figure the amount of data stored in a property by
examining its length and the data type. And arrays can be as easily
stored in property entry instances as single values are, provided that
we have enough space (we have up to 8 bytes). We can embed:
- up to 8 bytes from U8 arrays
- up to 4 words
- up to 2 double words
- one U64 value
- one (on 64 bit architectures) or 2 (on 32 bit) strings.
This change also has an effect of switching properties with small amount
of data to embed it instead of keeping it separate when copying such
properties.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
We do not need a special flag to know if we are dealing with an
array, as we can get that data from ratio between element length and
the data size, but we do need a flag to know whether or not the data
is stored directly inside property_entry.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
[ rjw: Subject & changelog, struct property_entry kerneldoc ]
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
There is no need to treat string arrays and single strings separately, we can go
exclusively by the element length in relation to data type size.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
There is absolutely no reason to have them as we can handle it all nicely in
property_entry_read_int_array().
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Instead of explicitly setting values of integer types when copying
property entries lets just copy entire value union when processing
non-array values.
For value arrays we no longer use union of pointers, but rather a single
void pointer, which allows us to remove property_set_pointer().
In property_get_pointer() we do not need to handle each data type
separately, we can simply return either the pointer or pointer to values
union.
We are not losing anything from removing typed pointer union because the
upper layers do their accesses through void pointers anyway, and we
trust the "type" of the property when interpret the data. We rely on
users of property entries on using PROPERTY_ENTRY_XXX() macros to
properly initialize entries instead of poking in the instances directly.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Because property_copy_string_array() stores the newly allocated pointer in the
destination property, we have an awkward code in property_entry_copy_data()
where we fetch the new pointer from dst.
Let's change property_copy_string_array() to return pointer and rely on the
common path in property_entry_copy_data() to store it in destination structure.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The prefix is used for printing purpose before a node, and it also works
as a separator between two nodes.
Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> (for OF)
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The fwnode framework did not have means to obtain the name of a node. Add
that now, in form of the fwnode_get_name() function and a corresponding
get_name fwnode op. OF and ACPI support is included.
Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org> (for OF)
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
to_software_node() does not need to modify the fwnode_handle it operates
on; therefore make it const. This allows passing a const fwnode_handle to
to_software_node().
Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The software_node_get_parent() returned a pointer to the parent swnode,
but did not take a reference to it, leading the caller to put a reference
that was not taken. Take that reference now.
Fixes: 59abd83672 ("drivers: base: Introducing software nodes to the firmware node framework")
Signed-off-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The software node is searched from a list that may be empty
when the function is called. This makes sure that the
function returns NULL if the list is empty.
Fixes: 1666faedb5 ("software node: Add software_node_find_by_name()")
Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The software node is searched from a list that may be empty
when the function is called. This makes sure that the
function returns NULL even if the list is empty.
Fixes: 80488a6b1d ("software node: Add support for static node descriptors")
Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Function that searches software nodes by node name.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
This makes it possible to support drivers that use
fwnode_property_get_reference_args() function.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Using the kobject name of the node instead of a device
property "name" in software_node_get_named_child_node().
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Until now the software nodes could only be created
dynamically with fwnode_create_software_node() function.
This introduces struct software_node data structure, which
makes it possible to describe the software nodes also
statically.
The statically described software nodes can be registered
with a new function fwnode_register_software_node(). This
also adds a helper fwnode_register_software_nodes()
which makes it possible to register an array of struct
software_nodes, i.e. multiple nodes at the same time.
There is no difference between statically described and
dynamically allocated software nodes. Even the registration
does not differ, except that during node creation the device
properties are only copied if the node is created
dynamically. With statically described nodes, the property
entries in the descriptor (struct software_node) are
assigned directly to the new software node that is being
created without any copies.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
It's possible to release the node ID immediately when
fwnode_remove_software_node() is called, no need to wait for
software_node_release() with that.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Software nodes are not forced to have device properties.
Adding check to property_entries_dup() to make it possible
to create software nodes that don't have any properties.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Tested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Fix sparse warning:
drivers/base/swnode.c:475:22: warning: symbol 'software_node_get_parent' was not declared. Should it be static?
drivers/base/swnode.c:484:22: warning: symbol 'software_node_get_next_child' was not declared. Should it be static?
Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
This makes it possible to support drivers that use
fwnode_get_named_child_node() and device_get_named_child_node()
functions.
The node name is for now taken from a device property named
"name". That mimics the old style of naming of the nodes in
devicetree (though with modern flattened DT, the name is
matched against the actual node-name, it used to be done
with a property "name"). In Open Firmware DT the "name"
property is also still being used.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The to_software_mode() macro can potentially return NULL, so also add
a NULL check on swnode before dereferencing it to avoid any NULL
pointer dereferences.
Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1476052 ("Explicit null dereferenced")
Fixes: 59abd83672 (drivers: base: Introducing software nodes to the firmware node framework)
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
The pointer p can be potentially NULL as macro to_software_node can
return NULL.
Add null check on p before dereferencing it to avoid any NULL pointer
dereferences.
Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1476039 ("Explicit null dereferenced")
Fixes: 59abd83672 (drivers: base: Introducing software nodes to the firmware node framework)
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Currently the node name is being formatting into a temporary string
node_name, however, kobject_init_and_add allows one to format up
a node name, so use that instead. This removes the need for the
node_name string and also cleans up the following warning:
Fixes clang warning:
warning: format string is not a string literal (potentially
insecure) [-Wformat-security]
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Concentrating struct property_entry processing to
drivers/base/swnode.c
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
Software node is a new struct fwnode_handle type that can be
used to describe devices in kernel (software). It is meant
to complement fwnodes representing real firmware nodes when
they are incomplete (for example missing device properties)
and to supply the primary fwnode when the firmware lacks
hardware description for a device completely.
The software node type is really meant to replace the
currently used "property_set" struct fwnode_handle type. The
handling of struct property_set is glued to the generic
device property handling code, and it is not possible to
create a struct property_set independently from the device
that it is bind to. struct property_set is only created when
device properties are added to already initialized struct
device, and control of it is only possible from the generic
property handling code.
Software nodes are instead designed to be created
independently from the device entries (struct device). It
makes them much more flexible, as then the device meant to
be bind to the node can be created at a later time, and from
another location. It is also possible to bind multiple
devices to a single software node if needed.
The software node implementation also includes support for
node hierarchy, which was the main motivation for this
commit. The node hierarchy was something that was requested
for the struct property_set, but it did not seem reasonable
to try to extend the property_set support for that purpose.
struct property_set was really meant only for device
property handling like the name suggests.
Support for struct property_set is not yet removed in this
commit, but it will be in the following one.
Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com>
Acked-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>
Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>
