linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] clk: twl: add clock driver for TWL6032

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]

Message-ID: <20230912205647.4be3b753@aktux>
Date:   Tue, 12 Sep 2023 20:56:47 +0200
From:   Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc:     dmitry.torokhov@...il.com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
        krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
        lee@...nel.org, bcousson@...libre.com, tony@...mide.com,
        mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org,
        linux-input@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/5] clk: twl: add clock driver for TWL6032

On Tue, 12 Sep 2023 19:15:54 +0200
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> wrote:

> Le 12/09/2023 à 00:13, Andreas Kemnade a écrit :
> > The TWL6032 has some clock outputs which are controlled like
> > fixed-voltage regulators, in some drivers for these chips
> > found in the wild, just the regulator api is abused for controlling
> > them, so simply use something similar to the regulator functions.
> > Due to a lack of hardware available for testing, leave out the
> > TWL6030-specific part of those functions.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
> > ---
> >   drivers/clk/Kconfig   |   9 ++
> >   drivers/clk/Makefile  |   1 +
> >   drivers/clk/clk-twl.c | 197 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   3 files changed, 207 insertions(+)
> >   create mode 100644 drivers/clk/clk-twl.c
> >   
> 
> ...
> 
> > +static int twl_clks_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct clk_hw_onecell_data *clk_data;
> > +	const struct twl_clks_data *hw_data;
> > +
> > +	struct twl_clock_info *cinfo;
> > +	int ret;
> > +	int i;
> > +	int count;
> > +
> > +	hw_data = twl6032_clks;
> > +	for (count = 0; hw_data[count].init.name; count++)
> > +		;  
> 
> Nit: does removing the /* sentinel */ and using 
> ARRAY_SIZE(twl_clks_data) would make sense and be simpler?
> 
well, I would like to have it prepared for different arrays
passed in some device data in the future, so I am choosing that
approach.

Regards,
Andreas