linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: add api to get clk consummer from clk

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: <1j8shbkhsq.fsf@starbuckisacylon.baylibre.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 May 2020 20:58:45 +0200
From:   Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
To:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: add api to get clk consummer from clk_hw


On Wed 27 May 2020 at 22:07, Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jerome,
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 7:09 PM Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com> wrote:
> [...]
>> + * Calls to this function must be balanced with calls clk_put()
>> + */
>> +struct clk *clk_hw_get_clk(struct clk_hw *hw)
> I haven't looked at it myself yet, but would it be hard to have a
> devm_ variant of this function as well?

Seems easy enough.
Stephen is this OK with you ?

I'm just wondering if this devm_ function should use the device pointer
embedded in the clk_hw structure or have it as an argument ?

The 1st option seems simpler but I'm not sure it is correct.

Thoughts ?

> a non-devm managed function would add boilerplate to the meson-mx-sdhc-mmc code
>
> also this may or may not simplify how to fetch the struct device
> pointer for this use-case.
> (that said, I only know about drivers for Amlogic related IP and there
> the devm_ variant can be used, but I don't know about other potential
> consumers of this new API)
>
>
> Thank you!
> Martin