[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <08ed1ae35b69e11e69ce178af41c77b0.sboyd@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 15:23:57 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Peng Fan (OSS) <peng.fan@....nxp.com>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
Cc: devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] clk: clk-conf: support assigned-clock-rates-u64
Quoting Peng Fan (OSS) (2024-07-30 01:57:55)
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
>
> i.MX95 System Management Control Firmware(SCMI) manages the clock
> function, it exposes PLL VCO which could support up to 5GHz rate that
> exceeds UINT32_MAX. So add assigned-clock-rates-u64 support
> to set rate that exceeds UINT32_MAX.
>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk-conf.c | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c b/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> index 058420562020..684e0c0738b3 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> @@ -81,11 +81,44 @@ static int __set_clk_parents(struct device_node *node, bool clk_supplier)
> static int __set_clk_rates(struct device_node *node, bool clk_supplier)
> {
> struct of_phandle_args clkspec;
> - int rc, index = 0;
> + int rc, count, index;
> struct clk *clk;
> - u32 rate;
> + u32 *rates __free(kfree);
> + bool rate_64 = false;
> +
> + count = of_property_count_u64_elems(node, "assigned-clock-rates-u64");
> + if (count <= 0) {
> + count = of_property_count_u32_elems(node, "assigned-clock-rates");
> + if (count <= 0)
> + return 0;
> +
> + rates = kcalloc(count, sizeof(u32), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!rates)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + rc = of_property_read_variable_u32_array(node,
> + "assigned-clock-rates",
> + rates,
> + 1, count);
> + } else {
> + rates = kcalloc(count, sizeof(u64), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!rates)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + rc = of_property_read_variable_u64_array(node,
> + "assigned-clock-rates-u64",
> + (u64 *)rates,
> + 1, count);
> + rate_64 = true;
> + }
Can this be less indented somehow?
u64 *rates_64 __free(kfree) = NULL;
u32 *rates __free(kfree) = NULL;
int count_64, count;
count = of_property_count_u32_elems(node, "assigned-clock-rates");
count_64 = of_property_count_u64_elems(node, "assigned-clock-rates-u64");
if (count_64 > 0) {
count = count_64;
rates_64 = kcalloc(count, sizeof(*rates_64), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!rates_64)
return -ENOMEM;
rc = of_property_read_u64_array(node,
"assigned-clock-rates-u64",
rates_64, count);
} else if (count > 0) {
rates = kcalloc(count, sizeof(*rates), GFP_KERNEL));
if (!rates)
return -ENOMEM;
rc = of_property_read_u32_array(node, "assigned-clock-rates",
rates, count);
} else {
return 0;
}
if (rc)
return rc;
for (index = 0; index < count; index++) {
unsigned long rate;
if (rates_64)
rate = rates_64[index];
else
rate = rates[index];
> +
> +
> + for (index = 0; index < count; index++) {
> + unsigned long rate;
> +
> + if (rate_64)
> + rate = ((u64 *)rates)[index];
Please no casts.
> + else
> + rate = rates[index];
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists