linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: dispcc-sm6115: Shrink single-parent definitions

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 15 Dec 2022 13:58:39 +0100
From:   Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, agross@...nel.org,
        andersson@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     marijn.suijten@...ainline.org,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: dispcc-sm6115: Shrink single-parent
 definitions



On 13.12.2022 23:24, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Konrad Dybcio (2022-12-13 02:43:33)
>> @@ -284,12 +268,13 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_vsync_clk_src = {
>>         .cmd_rcgr = 0x20a4,
>>         .mnd_width = 0,
>>         .hid_width = 5,
>> -       .parent_map = disp_cc_parent_map_1,
>>         .freq_tbl = ftbl_disp_cc_mdss_esc0_clk_src,
>>         .clkr.hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
>>                 .name = "disp_cc_mdss_vsync_clk_src",
>> -               .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_1,
>> -               .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_1),
>> +               .parent_data = &(const struct clk_parent_data){
>> +                       .index = DT_BI_TCXO,
>> +               },
>> +               .num_parents = 1,
>>                 .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
>>                 .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> 
> Is clk_rcg2_shared_ops and clk_rcg2_ops prepared for a NULL
> 'parent_map' pointer? _freq_tbl_determine_rate() is never called?
I didn't notice any regressions empirically, but perhaps it was
just by luck, you're right, disregard this patch..

Konrad