[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c0688a84-bd8e-1874-6fab-727bb6bd657e@microchip.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 10:20:28 +0000
From: <Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com>
To: <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>, <sboyd@...nel.org>
CC: <mturquette@...libre.com>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: at91: fix at91sam9x5 peripheral clock number
On 19/02/2019 at 17:51, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> nck() looks at the last id in an array and unfortunately,
> at91sam9x35_periphck has a sentinel, hence the id is 0 and the calculated
Well, the logic for all other SoC clk files is to not have such a
sentinel and deal differently with this type of array: why not modify
this file to match with others?
> number of peripheral clocks is 1 instead of a maximum of 31.
>
> Fixes: 1eabdc2f9dd8 ("clk: at91: add at91sam9x5 PMCs driver")
> Signed-off-by: Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>
> ---
> drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c | 3 +--
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c b/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c
> index 2fe225a697df..d37e7ed9eb90 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/at91sam9x5.c
> @@ -144,8 +144,7 @@ static void __init at91sam9x5_pmc_setup(struct device_node *np,
> return;
>
> at91sam9x5_pmc = pmc_data_allocate(PMC_MAIN + 1,
> - nck(at91sam9x5_systemck),
> - nck(at91sam9x35_periphck), 0);
> + nck(at91sam9x5_systemck), 31, 0);
I would prefer like it's done on other SoC clk files.
> if (!at91sam9x5_pmc)
> return;
>
>
--
Nicolas Ferre
Powered by blists - more mailing lists