linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] AT91: SAM9G45 - add a separate clock entry for every single TC block

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:42:56 +0200
From:	"avictor.za@...il.com" <avictor.za@...il.com>
To:	Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
Cc:	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Fabian Godehardt <fg@...ix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] AT91: SAM9G45 - add a separate clock entry for every
 single TC block

hi,

> +/* One additional fake clock for second TC block */
> +static struct clk tcb1_clk = {
> +       .name           = "tcb1_clk",
> +       .pmc_mask       = 0,
> +       .type           = CLK_TYPE_PERIPHERAL,
> +       .parent         = &tcb0_clk,
> +};
> +

Looking at this again...  since type is CLK_TYPE_PERIPHERAL, when you
call clk_register() the "parent" is changed to the master clock.

Which means, then later you call clk_enable() the "pmc_mask" is still
0, so 0 gets written (in pmc_periph_mode) to AT91_PMC_PCER.  So the
TCB clock won't be enabled.

Or am I missing something?


Regards,
  Andrew Victor
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/