[RFC PATCH 0/4] hwspinlock: refactor headers into public provider/consumer pair

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Sun, Jan 25, 2026 at 07:46:51PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> TLDR: I want to create a hwspinlock provider outside of the hwspinlock
> directory. So, I refactored the headers into a provider/consumer pair.
> Which seems to me like a reasonable seperation anyhow. No functional
> changes. My build tests went fine and buildbots are happy, too.
> 
> Longer explanation:
> 
> There is a device (MFIS) in newer Renesas SoCs which combines various
> things like hwspinlocks, mailboxes and other stuff. Sadly, these are not
> strictly separated. Registers are kind of mixed and its register
> unprotection scheme will need one of its own locks. I tried various
> paths to handle this device (MFD, auxiliary bus) but I concluded that
> the sub-device dependencies give enough reasons for a single driver in
> drivers/soc/. So, this series will allow me to instantiate a hwspinlock
> provider from the other directory.
> 
> Patches 1+2 do the actual refactoring with a fallback being in place. I
> used '-B' with git-format-patch in this RFC, so the actual changes are
> more visible when the headers are moved.
> 
> Patch 3 converts all the users. There are not many. We could try to get
> all the acks for this single patch. Or I can break it into single
> patches and send them to subsystems. I don't mind.
> 
> Patch 4 simply removes the fallback.
> 
> Looking forward to comments on this approach. If the hwspinlock
> maintainers like it as is, I would kindly propose to apply patches 1+2
> after 7.0-rc1 comes out. This might sound a bit hasty, but a) I want to
> avoid chasing a moving target and b) this would remove one dependency of
> the hwspinlock driver I originally intend to upstream, of course.
> 
> I would take care of patches 3+4 as needed.
> 
> A branch can be found here:
> 
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wsa/linux.git renesas/hwspinlock/refactor-includes
> 
> Patches are based on linux-next as of 2026-01-21.
> 
> Opinions?

I don't like the idea of sharing internal stuff. Why would we need to have
a struct hwspinlock to be visible?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko