linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 27/89] clk: bcm: Add BCM2711 DVP 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: <20200323105616.kiwcyxxcb7eqqfsc@gilmour.lan>
Date:   Mon, 23 Mar 2020 11:56:16 +0100
From:   Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc:     Eric Anholt <eric@...olt.net>,
        Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@...e.de>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
        linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>,
        Tim Gover <tim.gover@...pberrypi.com>,
        Phil Elwell <phil@...pberrypi.com>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 27/89] clk: bcm: Add BCM2711 DVP driver

Hi Stephen,

On Thu, Mar 12, 2020 at 06:00:59PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > +       dvp->clks[1] = clk_register_gate(&pdev->dev, "hdmi1-108MHz",
> > +                                        parent, CLK_IS_CRITICAL,
> > +                                        base + DVP_HT_RPI_MISC_CONFIG, 4,
> > +                                        CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE, &dvp->reset.lock);
>
> Can we use clk_hw APIs, document why CLK_IS_CRITICAL, and use something
> like clk_hw_register_gate_parent_data() so that we don't have to use
> of_clk_get_parent_name() above?

That function is new to me, and I'm not sure how I'm supposed to use it?

It looks like clk_hw_register_gate, clk_hw_register_gate_parent_hw and
clk_hw_register_gate_parent_data all call __clk_hw_register_gate with
the same arguments, each expecting the parent_name, so they look
equivalent?

It looks like the original intent was to have the parent name, clk_hw
or clk_parent_data as argument, but the macro itself was copy pasted
without changing the arguments it's calling __clk_hw_register_gate
with?

Maxime

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)