RE: [PATCH 2/4] i3c: master: Check if devices have i3c_dev_boardinfo on i3c_master_add_i3c_dev_locked()

[Vitor Soares]

From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 15:39:41

> On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 16:39:18 +0200
> Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 14:00:44 +0000
> > Vitor Soares <Vitor.Soares@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > Hi Boris,
> > > 
> > > From: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Date: Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 11:44:57
> > >   
> > > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2019 12:19:33 +0200
> > > > Vitor Soares <Vitor.Soares@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >     
> > > > > The I3C devices described in DT might not be attached to the master which
> > > > > doesn't allow to assign a specific dynamic address.    
> > > > 
> > > > I remember testing this when developing the framework, so, unless
> > > > another patch regressed it, it should already work. I suspect patch 1
> > > > is actually the regressing this use case.    
> > > 
> > > For today it doesn't address the case where the device is described with 
> > > static address = 0, which isn't attached to the controller.  
> > 
> > Hm, I'm pretty sure I had designed the code to support that case (see
> > [1]). It might be buggy, but nothing we can't fix I guess.
> > 
> 
> [1]https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__elixir.bootlin.com_linux_v5.3-2Drc6_source_drivers_i3c_master.c-23L1898&d=DwICAg&c=DPL6_X_6JkXFx7AXWqB0tg&r=qVuU64u9x77Y0Kd0PhDK_lpxFgg6PK9PateHwjb_DY0&m=IXS1ygIgEo5vwajk0iwd5aBDVBzRnVTjO3cg4iBmGNc&s=HC-AcYm-AZPrUBoALioej_BDnqOtJHltr39Z2yPkuU4&e= 

That is only valid if you have olddev which will only exist if static 
address != 0.