linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] clk: fixed-factor: Introduce *clk_hw_register_fixed_factor_parent

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:   Thu, 09 Jun 2022 15:12:09 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
Cc:     phone-devel@...r.kernel.org, ~postmarketos/upstreaming@...ts.sr.ht,
        AngeloGioacchino Del Regno 
        <angelogioacchino.delregno@...ainline.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...ainline.org>,
        Martin Botka <martin.botka@...ainline.org>,
        Jami Kettunen <jami.kettunen@...ainline.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Rob Clark <robdclark@...il.com>,
        Abhinav Kumar <quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com>,
        Sean Paul <sean@...rly.run>, David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Rajeev Nandan <quic_rajeevny@...cinc.com>,
        Vladimir Lypak <vladimir.lypak@...il.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Jonathan Marek <jonathan@...ek.ca>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, freedreno@...ts.freedesktop.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/11] clk: fixed-factor: Introduce *clk_hw_register_fixed_factor_parent_hw()

Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2022-06-02 03:20:19)
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 at 01:07, Marijn Suijten
> <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org> wrote:
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c b/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c
> > index 54942d758ee6..fabb98d0cdb2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c
> > @@ -78,7 +78,8 @@ static void devm_clk_hw_register_fixed_factor_release(struct device *dev, void *
> >
> >  static struct clk_hw *
> >  __clk_hw_register_fixed_factor(struct device *dev, struct device_node *np,
> > -               const char *name, const char *parent_name, int index,
> > +               const char *name, const char *parent_name,
> > +               const struct clk_hw *parent_hw, int index,
> >                 unsigned long flags, unsigned int mult, unsigned int div,
> >                 bool devm)
> >  {
> > @@ -108,7 +109,9 @@ __clk_hw_register_fixed_factor(struct device *dev, struct device_node *np,
> >         init.name = name;
> >         init.ops = &clk_fixed_factor_ops;
> >         init.flags = flags;
> > -       if (parent_name)
> > +       if (parent_hw)
> > +               init.parent_hws = &parent_hw;
> > +       else if (parent_name)
> >                 init.parent_names = &parent_name;
> 
> If you change the order of if clauses, you won't have to introduce
> unnecessary changes.

Indeed, please do that.

> 
> >         else
> >                 init.parent_data = &pdata;
> > @@ -148,17 +151,50 @@ struct clk_hw *devm_clk_hw_register_fixed_factor_index(struct device *dev,
> >                 const char *name, unsigned int index, unsigned long flags,
> >                 unsigned int mult, unsigned int div)
> >  {
> > -       return __clk_hw_register_fixed_factor(dev, NULL, name, NULL, index,
> > -                                             flags, mult, div, true);
> > +       return __clk_hw_register_fixed_factor(dev, NULL, name, NULL, NULL,
> > +                                             index, flags, mult, div, true);
> 
> Here (and several times later) you are inserting an argument and then
> moving arguments to the next line. My slight preference would be to
> just insert the arg (and maybe break the line if it gets too long) w/o
> touching the next lines.

I'd just add the argument at the end because when it is added in the
middle it makes the diff more difficult to read.