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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 19 Dec 2012 09:26:36 +0000
From:	Russell King - ARM Linux <>
To:	Tony Prisk <>
Cc:	Mike Turquette <>,,
	Arm Kernel Mailing List 
Subject: Re: Inconsistency in clk framework

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 05:10:33PM +1300, Tony Prisk wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> In attempting to remove some IS_ERR_OR_NULL references, it was pointed
> out that clk_get() can return NULL if CONFIG_HAVE_CLK is not defined.

That is correct - but why is that a problem?  As far as users are
concerned, NULL is a valid clock.  If HAVE_CLK is undefined, do you
want all your drivers to suddenly stop working?

> This seems to contradict the kernel docs associated with the normal
> clk_get (when HAVE_CLK is defined) which states:
> * Returns a struct clk corresponding to the clock producer, or
> * valid IS_ERR() condition containing errno.
> Wouldn't a return code of ERR_PTR(-ENOENT) make more sense and be inline
> with the empty of_ versions as well (which return -ENOENT when CONFIG_OF
> is undefined).


> Also, I noticed that clk_get_sys() doesn't appear to be defined in clk.h
> when HAVE_CLK is undefined - is this correct?

It was never promoted to an official API because its only platform code
which should be using it; no device driver (which should have a struct
device to pass into clk_get()) should ever use clk_get_sys().
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists