linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] clk: qcom: Add LUCID

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: <20211203001844.78E7FC00446@smtp.kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 02 Dec 2021 16:18:43 -0800
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     agross@...nel.org, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, maz@...nel.org,
        mturquette@...libre.com, quic_vamslank@...cinc.com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org,
        Vamsi Krishna Lanka <quic_vamslank@...cinc.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/5] clk: qcom: Add LUCID_EVO PLL type for SDX65

Quoting quic_vamslank@...cinc.com (2021-12-01 16:21:32)
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-alpha-pll.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-alpha-pll.c
> index eaedcceb766f..e0c67b76d8ac 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-alpha-pll.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-alpha-pll.c
> @@ -1741,35 +1760,47 @@ static int alpha_pll_lucid_5lpe_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
>                                           LUCID_5LPE_ALPHA_PLL_ACK_LATCH);
>  }
>  
> +static int __clk_lucid_pll_postdiv_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
> +                                            unsigned long parent_rate, unsigned long enable_vote_run)
> +{
> +        struct clk_alpha_pll_postdiv *pll = to_clk_alpha_pll_postdiv(hw);
> +       struct regmap *regmap = pll->clkr.regmap;

What's going on with the tabbing here?

> +        int i, val = 0, div, ret;

Do we need to initialize to 0?

> +        u32 mask;
> +
> +        /*
> +         * If the PLL is in FSM mode, then treat set_rate callback as a
> +         * no-operation.
> +         */
> +        ret = regmap_read(regmap, PLL_USER_CTL(pll), &val);
> +        if (ret)
> +                return ret;
> +
> +        if (val & enable_vote_run)
> +                return 0;
> +
> +        if (!pll->post_div_table) {
> +                pr_err("Missing the post_div_table for the PLL\n");

Probably useful to know which PLL is missing a table here.