linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: core: link consumer with clock driver

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: <154386483105.88331.13970025193347328031@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:   Mon, 03 Dec 2018 11:20:31 -0800
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     kbuild test robot <lkp@...el.com>, kbuild-all@...org,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>,
        Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@...tlin.com>,
        Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
        Gregory Clement <gregory.clement@...tlin.com>,
        Nadav Haklai <nadavh@...vell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: core: link consumer with clock driver

Quoting Miquel Raynal (2018-11-30 02:20:52)
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> wrote on Fri, 30 Nov 2018 01:26:20
> -0800:
> 
> > Quoting Miquel Raynal (2018-11-23 01:11:32)
> > > Would you agree with me adding dummy functions in the #else section
> > > like:
> > > 
> > > static inline void __clk_device_link(struct device *consumer, struct clk *clk)
> > > {
> > >        return;
> > > }
> > > 
> > > static inline void __clk_device_unlink(struct clk *clk)
> > > {
> > >        return;
> > > }
> > > 
> > > Do you want me to also declare these functions in the #if section
> > > (with the external keyword) to balance the above declarations?  
> > 
> > Why can't we do the linking in __clk_get() and __clk_put()?
> > 
> 
> Because we need the caller's 'struct device' to make the link and
> this is not available in __clk_get(). I tried to ad it as parameter but
> I don't think it is possible to retrieve a 'struct device' from the
> device name. The functions where this is problematic are:
> * clk.c:__of_clk_get_from_provider()
> * clkdev.c:clk_get_sys()
> 
> By the way in my new version I called the helpers:
> * clk_{link,unlink}_hierarchy()
> * clk_{link,unlink}_consumer()
> 
> I will send a new version with these helpers, but if you have anything
> in mind to help me achieve the above request, I will welcome the idea.
> 

We can do the linking in __clk_get() and __clk_put() if we poke into the
struct clk -> struct clk_core and bury the struct device into each
clk_core structure.