linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] CLK: uninline clk_prepare() and 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]

Message-ID: <20121122021750.GD25470@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Date:	Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:17:50 -0800
From:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Cc:	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...com>,
	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] CLK: uninline clk_prepare() and clk_unprepare()

On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 10:38:59PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:54:24PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 12:43:24PM -0800, Mike Turquette wrote:
> > > Quoting Viresh Kumar (2012-11-20 02:13:55)
> > > > On 20 November 2012 14:52, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > We'll need to invoke clk_unprepare() via a pointer in our devm_*
> > > > > conversion so let's uninline the pair.
> > > > 
> > > > Sorry, but you aren't doing this :(
> > > > This routine is already uninlined as it is in clk.c
> > > > 
> > > > Instead you are just moving clk_prepare(), etc calls within
> > > > #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK
> > > > #else
> > > > #endif
> > > > 
> > > > I doubt why they have been added under #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK_PREPARE
> > > > earlier. Can they exist without CONFIG_HAVE_CLK
> > > > 
> > > > @Mike: ?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > HAVE_CLK logically wraps HAVE_CLK_PREPARE.  There is no point in
> > > selecting HAVE_CLK_PREPARE without HAVE_CLK.
> > > 
> > > Looking through the code I see that this used to be the case.  Commit
> > > 93abe8e "clk: add non CONFIG_HAVE_CLK routines" moved the
> > > clk_(un)prepare declarations outside of #ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK.  That
> > > commit was authored by you.  Can you elaborate on why that aspect of the
> > > patch was needed?
> > > 
> > 
> > BTW, it looks like the only place where we select HAVE_CLK_PREPARE is
> > IMX platform and it also selects COMMON_CLK so I think HAVE_CLK_PREPARE
> > can be removed now.
> 
> You've checked non-ARM architectures too?

Yes:

[dtor@...r-d630 linux-next]$ grep -r HAVE_CLK_PREPARE .
./arch/arm/Kconfig:     select HAVE_CLK_PREPARE
Binary file ./.git/objects/pack/pack-7dad5ee164f601f1327dc78648fa317772c2d872.pack matches
./include/linux/clk.h:#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK_PREPARE
./include/linux/clk.h:#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK_PREPARE
./drivers/clk/Kconfig:config HAVE_CLK_PREPARE
./drivers/clk/Kconfig:  select HAVE_CLK_PREPARE

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry
--
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/