linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 2/3] clk: Make clk API return per-user struct clk instances

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: <20150119205908.GC27202@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Mon, 19 Jan 2015 12:59:08 -0800
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier.martinez@...labora.co.uk>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 2/3] clk: Make clk API return per-user struct clk
 instances

On 01/19, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> index 97f3425..f2a1ff3 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> @@ -694,32 +751,32 @@ long __clk_mux_determine_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
>  			      unsigned long *best_parent_rate,
>  			      struct clk_hw **best_parent_p)
>  {
> -	struct clk *clk = hw->clk, *parent, *best_parent = NULL;
> +	struct clk_core *core = hw->clk->core, *parent, *best_parent = NULL;

Can't we just use hw->core here?

>  	int i, num_parents;
>  	unsigned long parent_rate, best = 0;
>  
>  
> @@ -820,15 +877,18 @@ int clk_prepare(struct clk *clk)
>  {
>  	int ret;
>  
> +	if (IS_ERR_OR_NULL(clk))
> +		return PTR_ERR(clk);

What's going on here? Should be if (!clk)?

> +
>  	clk_prepare_lock();
> -	ret = __clk_prepare(clk);
> +	ret = clk_core_prepare(clk->core);
>  	clk_prepare_unlock();
>  
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_prepare);
> @@ -1066,9 +1149,24 @@ long clk_get_accuracy(struct clk *clk)
>  
>  	return accuracy;
>  }
> +
> +/**
> + * clk_get_accuracy - return the accuracy of clk
> + * @clk: the clk whose accuracy is being returned
> + *
> + * Simply returns the cached accuracy of the clk, unless
> + * CLK_GET_ACCURACY_NOCACHE flag is set, which means a recalc_rate will be
> + * issued.
> + * If clk is NULL then returns 0.
> + */
> +long clk_get_accuracy(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> +	return clk_core_get_accuracy(clk->core);

Oops. Missing NULL check.

> +}
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_get_accuracy);
>  
> @@ -1130,14 +1220,29 @@ unsigned long clk_get_rate(struct clk *clk)
[...]
> + *
> + * Simply returns the cached rate of the clk, unless CLK_GET_RATE_NOCACHE flag
> + * is set, which means a recalc_rate will be issued.
> + * If clk is NULL then returns 0.
> + */
> +unsigned long clk_get_rate(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> +	return clk_core_get_rate(clk->core);

Oops. Missing NULL check.

> +}
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_get_rate);
> @@ -1629,37 +1741,26 @@ static struct clk *__clk_init_parent(struct clk *clk)
[...]
> -int clk_set_parent(struct clk *clk, struct clk *parent)
> +void __clk_reparent(struct clk *clk, struct clk *new_parent)
> +{
> +	clk_core_reparent(clk->core, new_parent->core);
> +}

Is this used? Looks like we can remove it. Sorry, not sure how I
missed this last time.

> +
> +static int clk_core_set_parent(struct clk_core *clk, struct clk_core *parent)
>  {
>  	int ret = 0;
>  	int p_index = 0;
> @@ -1719,6 +1820,28 @@ out:
[...]
> +int clk_set_parent(struct clk *clk, struct clk *parent)
> +{
> +	return clk_core_set_parent(clk->core, parent->core);

Oops. Missing NULL check for both inputs.

> +}
>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_set_parent);
>  
>  /**
> @@ -1793,18 +1909,31 @@ out:
>  }
>  
>  /**
> + * clk_get_phase - return the phase shift of a clock signal
> + * @clk: clock signal source
> + *
> + * Returns the phase shift of a clock node in degrees, otherwise returns
> + * -EERROR.
> + */
> +int clk_get_phase(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> +	return clk_core_get_phase(clk->core);

Oops. Missing NULL check.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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/