linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/22] clk: samsung: exynos5410: Provide fin

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e805f0d3-038b-72ce-4464-ac3605e9e5bb@osg.samsung.com>
Date:	Mon, 9 May 2016 16:19:46 -0400
From:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
To:	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
	Kukjin Kim <kgene@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
	Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/22] clk: samsung: exynos5410: Provide fin_pll
 external fixed clock

Hello Krzysztof,

On 05/08/2016 03:05 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Just like clock driver for Exynos542x/5800, provide the fixed clock here
> so the clock bindings and their consumers would be consistent and
> similar.
> 
> However a clock named "fin_pll" is already provided by generic
> fixed-clock and it is both referenced in the clock driver (by name) and
> in DT (by phandle). To make the transition smooth, first introduce the
> new external fixed clock here under temporary, different name and switch
> internal users to it.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
> ---

[snip]

>  
> +/* Same as in Exynos5420 */
> +static const struct of_device_id ext_clk_match[] __initconst = {
> +	{ .compatible = "samsung,exynos5420-oscclk", .data = (void *)0, },

Since using designated initializers, I was about to say that there is no need
to explicitly set .data to 0 since omitted fields are implicitly initialized...

> +	{ },
> +};
> +
>  /* register exynos5410 clocks */
>  static void __init exynos5410_clk_init(struct device_node *np)
>  {
> @@ -192,6 +204,10 @@ static void __init exynos5410_clk_init(struct device_node *np)
>  
>  	ctx = samsung_clk_init(np, reg_base, CLK_NR_CLKS);
>  
> +	samsung_clk_of_register_fixed_ext(ctx, exynos5x_fixed_rate_ext_clks,
> +			ARRAY_SIZE(exynos5x_fixed_rate_ext_clks),
> +			ext_clk_match);
> +

... but then I noticed that .data is used as exynos5x_fixed_rate_ext_clks
array index in samsung_clk_of_register_fixed_ext(). So makes sense to set
it explicitly to make the intent clear.

Reviewed-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America