linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: Use a separate struct for holding init data.

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]

Message-ID: <20120426083924.GE17184@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:39:24 +0200
From:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
To:	Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>
Cc:	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	Arnd Bergman <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Jamie Iles <jamie@...ieiles.com>,
	Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...aro.org>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
	Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...aro.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Use a separate struct for holding init data.

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 10:58:56PM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> Create a struct clk_init_data to hold all data that needs to be passed from
> the platfrom specific driver to the common clock framework during clock
> registration. Add a pointer to this struct inside clk_hw.
> 
> This has several advantages:
> * Completely hides struct clk from many clock platform drivers and static
>   clock initialization code that don't care for static initialization of
>   the struct clks.
> * For platforms that want to do complete static initialization, it removed
>   the need to directly mess with the struct clk's fields while still
>   allowing to statically allocate struct clk. This keeps the code more
>   future proof even if they include clk-private.h.
> * Simplifies the generic clk_register() function and allows adding optional
>   fields in the future without modifying the function signature.
> * Simplifies the static initialization of clocks on all platforms by
>   removing the need for forward delcarations or convoluted macros.

Can we please stop messing with the function prototypes? So you prefer
passing a struct to clk_register which is fine and yes, it may have
advantages. But do we really need to change the prototype? Why can't we
just add a new function?

I am generally open to do these changes, but we have come to the point
where people actually want to *use* the clock framework instead of
rebasing their stuff onto the latest patches.

Sascha

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           |                             |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0    |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686           | Fax:   +49-5121-206917-5555 |
--
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/