linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: mvebu: dynamically allocate resources in Armada CP110 system controller

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160830184309.GB12510@codeaurora.org>
Date:   Tue, 30 Aug 2016 11:43:09 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:     Marcin Wojtas <mw@...ihalf.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@...edaemon.net>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
        Gregory Clément 
        <gregory.clement@...e-electrons.com>, nadavh@...vell.com,
        Lior Amsalem <alior@...vell.com>,
        Tomasz Nowicki <tn@...ihalf.com>,
        Grzegorz Jaszczyk <jaz@...ihalf.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: mvebu: dynamically allocate resources in Armada
 CP110 system controller

On 08/30, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> 2016-08-25 2:16 GMT+02:00 Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>:
> > On 08/23, Marcin Wojtas wrote:
> >> @@ -335,10 +343,12 @@ static int cp110_syscon_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>               cp110_clks[CP110_MAX_CORE_CLOCKS + i] = clk;
> >>       }
> >>
> >> -     ret = of_clk_add_provider(np, cp110_of_clk_get, &cp110_clk_data);
> >> +     ret = of_clk_add_provider(np, cp110_of_clk_get, cp110_clk_data);
> >
> > It would be nice if this could be converted to
> > of_clk_add_hw_provider().
> 
> Will try it. Shouldn't such change be placed in separate commit?

Yes, of course.

> 
> >
> >>       if (ret)
> >>               goto fail_clk_add;
> >>
> >> +     platform_set_drvdata(pdev, cp110_clks);
> >> +
> >>       return 0;
> >>
> >>  fail_clk_add:
> >> @@ -365,6 +375,7 @@ fail0:
> >>
> >>  static int cp110_syscon_clk_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>  {
> >> +     struct clk **cp110_clks = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> >
> > Is this variable unused now?
> 
> No, why? Just below there is a loop using it. Before it was taken from
> global variable, which I got rid of.
> 

Ok. I was just looking at the patch context.

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