linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 12/44] clk: davinci: Add platform information for TI DA850 PSC

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: <b6baa17e-1239-c209-9eca-52e5da73e921@lechnology.com>
Date:   Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:21:18 -0600
From:   David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
To:     Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 12/44] clk: davinci: Add platform information for TI
 DA850 PSC

On 01/16/2018 08:00 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
> On Monday 08 January 2018 07:47 AM, David Lechner wrote:
>> +void __init da850_psc_clk_init(void __iomem *psc0, void __iomem *psc1)
>> +{
>> +	struct clk_onecell_data *clk_data;
>> +
>> +	clk_data = davinci_psc_register_clocks(psc0, da850_psc0_info, 16);
>> +	if (!clk_data)
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[3], NULL, "ti-aemif");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[3], "aemif", "davinci-nand.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[4], NULL, "spi_davinci.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[5], NULL, "da830-mmc.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[9], NULL, "serial8250.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[14], "arm", NULL);
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[15], NULL, "davinci-rproc.0");
>> +
>> +	clk_free_onecell_data(clk_data);
>> +
>> +	clk_data = davinci_psc_register_clocks(psc1, da850_psc1_info, 32);
>> +	if (!clk_data)
>> +		return;
>> +
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[1], "usb20_psc_clk", NULL);
> 
> Is this con_id really needed now? Searching for "usb20_psc_clk" in your
> tree results in only this one hit.

Yes, this is left over from previous attempts.

> 
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[1], NULL, "musb-da8xx");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[1], NULL, "cppi41-dmaengine");
> 
> I guess multiple dev_id matches like these are another hurdle in moving
> them to davinci_psc_clk_info[] table? If its too cumbersome to keep
> multiple entries in the table, they can be handled as an exception at
> the end of processing the table? Still they are not the norm so I hope
> the normal case will still benefit.

Right, as I mentioned in the reply to the previous patch, instead of
assigning a con_id and dev_id to each clock, we would need to assign
an array with a list of clocks. I think that would work better than
trying to handle the extras as an exception since there, on average,
about 5 per SoC.

> 
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[2], NULL, "ohci-da8xx");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[3], "gpio", NULL);
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[5], NULL, "davinci_emac.1");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[5], "fck", "davinci_mdio.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[7], NULL, "davinci-mcasp.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[8], "fck", "ahci_da850");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[9], NULL, "vpif");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[10], NULL, "spi_davinci.1");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[11], NULL, "i2c_davinci.2");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[12], NULL, "serial8250.1");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[13], NULL, "serial8250.2");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[14], NULL, "davinci-mcbsp.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[15], NULL, "davinci-mcbsp.1");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[16], "fck", "da8xx_lcdc.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[17], "fck", "ehrpwm.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[17], "fck", "ehrpwm.1");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[18], NULL, "da830-mmc.1");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[20], "fck", "ecap.0");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[20], "fck", "ecap.1");
>> +	clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[20], "fck", "ecap.2");
>> +
>> +	clk_free_onecell_data(clk_data);
>> +}
> 
> Thanks,
> Sekhar
>