linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V8 2/8] clk: qcom: Add Global Clock controller (GCC) driver for IPQ5018

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:   Fri, 2 Jun 2023 16:11:21 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Sricharan Ramabadhran <quic_srichara@...cinc.com>
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, andersson@...nel.org, konrad.dybcio@...aro.org,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, ulf.hansson@...aro.org,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org,
        p.zabel@...gutronix.de, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, robimarko@...il.com,
        krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V8 2/8] clk: qcom: Add Global Clock controller (GCC)
 driver for IPQ5018

On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 11:24 AM Sricharan Ramabadhran
<quic_srichara@...cinc.com> wrote:
>
> Add support for the global clock controller found on IPQ5018
> based devices.

...

>  config IPQ_GCC_5332
>         tristate "IPQ5332 Global Clock Controller"
>         depends on ARM64 || COMPILE_TEST
>         help
>           Support for the global clock controller on ipq5332 devices.
> -         Say Y if you want to use peripheral devices such as UART, SPI,
> -         i2c, USB, SD/eMMC, etc.

Nothing in the commit message about this. Please, elaborate.

...

> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/of.h>
> +#include <linux/of_device.h>
> +#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
> +#include <linux/regmap.h>
> +#include <linux/reset-controller.h>

Why not keep this ordered?

Missing bits.h and maybe others, but in an unordered list it's harder to check.

...

> +                       &gpll4_main.clkr.hw

Can we keep trailing comma here and in similar cases, like

> +                       &ubi32_pll_main.clkr.hw
> +                       &gpll0_main.clkr.hw

(and many others)?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko