[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 17:07:38 -0800
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
Cc: linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v2 06/16] clk: move core->parents allocation to
clk_register()
On 12/28, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> Currently, __clk_core_init() allows failure of the kcalloc() for the
> core->parents. So, clk_fetch_parent_index() and __clk_init_parent()
> also try to allocate core->parents in case it has not been allocated
> yet. Scattering memory allocation here and there makes things
> complicated.
>
> Like other clk_core members, allocate core->parents in clk_register()
> and let it fail in case of memory shortage. If we cannot allocate
> such a small piece of memory, the system is already insane. There is
> no point to postpone the memory allocation.
>
> Also, allocate core->parents regardless of core->num_parents. We want
> it even if core->num_parents == 1 because clk_fetch_parent_index()
> might be called against the clk_core with a single parent.
>
> If core->num_parents == 0, core->parents is set to ZERO_SIZE_PTR. It
> is harmless because no access happens to core->parents in such a case.
>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
> ---
Applied to clk-next
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists