linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk

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:	Sun, 1 Apr 2012 16:34:50 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get()

On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 08:26:10AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 4/1/2012 4:32 AM, Mark Brown wrote:

> >  Documentation/driver-model/devres.txt |    3 +++
> >  drivers/clk/clkdev.c                  |   25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  include/linux/clk.h                   |   20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

> But why is this part of clkdev.c? devm_clk_get() should work regardless
> of the implementation of clk_get() so can we put it into some other file
> that is compiled if HAVE_CLK=y so everyone benefits from this and not
> just users who select CLKDEV_LOOKUP?

Mostly just because clk_get() is part of clkdev.c and I didn't feel like
creating a new file, though also because I really hope that we're going
to be moving away from open coding clock framework things so that we can
start to push clock API usage into non-SoC code.  Things like adding new
clocks are going to be a part of that.

To put it another way, why would a platform want to avoid clkdev?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)