linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] wifi: brcmfmac: Add optional lpo clock enable support

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: <d7068c96e102eaf6c35a77eb76cd067d@manjaro.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 09:12:20 +0200
From: Dragan Simic <dsimic@...jaro.org>
To: Jacobe Zang <jacobe.zang@...ion.com>
Cc: robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, heiko@...ech.de, kvalo@...nel.org,
 davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
 pabeni@...hat.com, conor+dt@...nel.org, arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com,
 efectn@...tonmail.com, jagan@...eble.ai, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arend@...adcom.com,
 linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, megi@....cz,
 duoming@....edu.cn, bhelgaas@...gle.com, minipli@...ecurity.net,
 brcm80211@...ts.linux.dev, brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com,
 nick@...das.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/5] wifi: brcmfmac: Add optional lpo clock enable
 support

Hello Jacobe,

Please see one comment below.

On 2024-07-29 09:01, Jacobe Zang wrote:
> WiFi modules often require 32kHz clock to function. Add support to
> enable the clock to PCIe driver.
> 
> Co-developed-by: Ondrej Jirman <megi@....cz>
> Signed-off-by: Ondrej Jirman <megi@....cz>
> Signed-off-by: Jacobe Zang <jacobe.zang@...ion.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/of.c | 9 +++++++++
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/of.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/of.c
> index e406e11481a62..4db188a41fd52 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/of.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/of.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  #include <linux/of.h>
>  #include <linux/of_irq.h>
>  #include <linux/of_net.h>
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
> 
>  #include <defs.h>
>  #include "debug.h"
> @@ -70,6 +71,7 @@ void brcmf_of_probe(struct device *dev, enum
> brcmf_bus_type bus_type,
>  {
>  	struct brcmfmac_sdio_pd *sdio = &settings->bus.sdio;
>  	struct device_node *root, *np = dev->of_node;
> +	struct clk *clk;
>  	const char *prop;
>  	int irq;
>  	int err;
> @@ -113,6 +115,13 @@ void brcmf_of_probe(struct device *dev, enum
> brcmf_bus_type bus_type,
>  		of_node_put(root);
>  	}
> 
> +	clk = devm_clk_get_optional_enabled(dev, "lpo");
> +	if (IS_ERR(clk))
> +	if (clk) {

These two lines looks really confusing.  Shouldn't it be just a single
"if (!IS_ERR(clk)) {" line instead?

> +		brcmf_dbg(INFO, "enabling 32kHz clock\n");
> +		clk_set_rate(clk, 32768);
> +	}
> +
>  	if (!np || !of_device_is_compatible(np, "brcm,bcm4329-fmac"))
>  		return;