linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] OPP: Disallow "opp-hz" property without a corresponding 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: <20221124042304.pk3rh7nfkanhlgsm@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Thu, 24 Nov 2022 09:53:04 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
Cc:     Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>, Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>,
        Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, andersson@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] OPP: Disallow "opp-hz" property without a
 corresponding clk

On 22-11-22, 18:56, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> If there is no .set_rate() callback implemented by the clock provider, it won't
> hurt, right?

It shouldn't, I guess. Well, in that case, is the first patch even
required ? Maybe we should keep it, this makes clear that we won't
even call set_rate(), irrespective of the face that it is implemented
or not.

Also, the clk provider may not be part of this file later on, for
other SoC versions, and it is better in that case too.

-- 
viresh