[PATCH 2/2] drivers: remove bogus DM_FLAG_PROBE_AFTER_BIND flags

[Simon Glass]

Hi Caleb,

On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 at 05:00, Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly at linaro.org> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 18/01/2025 05:32, Simon Glass wrote:
> > On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 at 00:29, Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly at linaro.org
> > <mailto:caleb.connolly at linaro.org>> wrote:
> >>
> >> Some drivers set DM_FLAG_PROBE_AFTER_BIND, this does nothing since it's
> >> only every applied on a per-device basis.
> >>
> >> Remove the flags.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Caleb Connolly <caleb.connolly at linaro.org
> > <mailto:caleb.connolly at linaro.org>>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi.c  | 1 -
> >>  drivers/watchdog/da9063-wdt.c | 1 -
> >>  2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi.c b/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi.c
> >> index 713d93a200c4..851aa737c03e 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/mailbox/zynqmp-ipi.c
> >> @@ -269,6 +269,5 @@ U_BOOT_DRIVER(zynqmp_ipi) = {
> >>         .name = "zynqmp_ipi",
> >>         .id = UCLASS_NOP,
> >>         .of_match = zynqmp_ipi_ids,
> >>         .probe = zynqmp_ipi_probe,
> >> -       .flags = DM_FLAG_PROBE_AFTER_BIND,
> >>  };
> >> diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/da9063-wdt.c b/drivers/watchdog/da9063-wdt.c
> >> index b7216b578630..ec9bc0330114 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/watchdog/da9063-wdt.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/watchdog/da9063-wdt.c
> >> @@ -144,6 +144,5 @@ U_BOOT_DRIVER(da9063_wdt) = {
> >>         .name = "da9063-wdt",
> >>         .id = UCLASS_WDT,
> >>         .of_match = da9063_wdt_ids,
> >>         .ops = &da9063_wdt_ops,
> >> -       .flags = DM_FLAG_PROBE_AFTER_BIND,
> >>  };
> >>
> >> --
> >> 2.48.0
> >>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org <mailto:sjg at chromium.org>>
> >
> > It is actually a bit unclear, since the comments for struct driver
> > mention DM_FLAG_... for the flags.
>
> Yep, some of the flags (most even?) can be applied to drivers and there
> is no proper distinction between which apply to drivers and which to
> devices.

I would rather have one set of flags if we can.

There are flags which only affect binding so perhaps they should be at
the start of the enum, with flags which only affect the device after
that.

But the original reason for not setting a flag like
DM_FLAG_PROBE_AFTER_BIND in the driver was that the driver wanted to
control whether to set it in the device.

>
> DRIVER_FLAG_... and DEV_FLAG_... or something maybe better, something to
> revisit in the future for sure.
>
> Thx for the review

Regards,
SImon