linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 4/5] clk: x86: Support RV architecture

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]

Date:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 18:03:16 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     akshu.agrawal@....com
Cc:     Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] clk: x86: Support RV architecture

Quoting Akshu Agrawal (2020-07-12 17:59:52)
> There is minor difference between previous family of SoC and
> the current one. Which is the there is only 48Mh fixed clk.
> There is no mux and no option to select another freq as there in previous.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Akshu Agrawal <akshu.agrawal@....com>
> ---

I only see four out of five patches and there isn't a cover letter. I
have no idea if I can apply this change or if you're expecting me to ack
it. Please help make my life a little easier!

>  drivers/clk/x86/clk-fch.c | 55 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/x86/clk-fch.c b/drivers/clk/x86/clk-fch.c
> index b252f0cf0628..a8aac71a3b65 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/x86/clk-fch.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/x86/clk-fch.c
> @@ -61,9 +78,17 @@ static int fch_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  static int fch_clk_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  {
>         int i;
> +       struct fch_clk_data *fch_data;
> +
> +       fch_data = dev_get_platdata(&pdev->dev);
>  
> -       for (i = 0; i < ST_MAX_CLKS; i++)
> -               clk_hw_unregister(hws[i]);
> +       if (!fch_data->is_rv) {
> +               for (i = 0; i < ST_MAX_CLKS; i++)
> +                       clk_hw_unregister(hws[i]);
> +       } else {
> +               for (i = 0; i < RV_MAX_CLKS; i++)
> +                       clk_hw_unregister(hws[i]);

Can ST_MAX_CLKS or RV_MAX_CLKS be a local variable and then the loop
consolidated.