linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v5 2/3] clk: canaan: Add clock driver for Canaan K230

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: <ef7a6ae8-4cc7-401a-81f1-0975c939176c@zohomail.com>
Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2025 15:33:44 +0800
From: Xukai Wang <kingxukai@...omail.com>
To: Troy Mitchell <troymitchell988@...il.com>
Cc: linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
 Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>,
 Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
 Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
 Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
 Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v5 2/3] clk: canaan: Add clock driver for Canaan
 K230

On 2025/3/20 15:09, Troy Mitchell wrote:
> On 2025/3/20 11:25, Xukai Wang wrote:
> ...
>> +struct k230_clk {
>> +	int id;
>> +	struct k230_sysclk *ksc;
>> +	struct clk_hw hw;
>> +};
>> +
>> +#define to_k230_clk(_hw)	container_of(_hw, struct k230_clk, hw)
>> +
>> +/* K230 SYSCLK. */
> Check other places and remove unnecessary comments.
OK, I get it.
>> +
>> +static unsigned long k230_pll_get_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long parent_rate)
>> +{
>> +	struct k230_pll *pll = to_k230_pll(hw);
>> +	struct k230_sysclk *ksc = pll->ksc;
>> +	u32 reg;
>> +	u32 r, f, od;
>> +
>> +	reg = readl(pll->bypass);
>> +	if (reg & K230_PLL_BYPASS_ENABLE)
>> +		return parent_rate;
>> +
>> +	reg = readl(pll->lock);
>> +	if (!(reg & (K230_PLL_STATUS_MASK))) { /* unlocked */
> unnecessary comment and wrong position.
I'll modify it.
>> +		dev_err(&ksc->pdev->dev, "%s is unlock.\n", clk_hw_get_name(hw));
>> +		return 0;
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	reg = readl(pll->div);
>> +	r = ((reg >> K230_PLL_R_SHIFT) & K230_PLL_R_MASK) + 1;
>> +	f = ((reg >> K230_PLL_F_SHIFT) & K230_PLL_F_MASK) + 1;
>> +	od = ((reg >> K230_PLL_OD_SHIFT) & K230_PLL_OD_MASK) + 1;
>> +
>> +	return mul_u64_u32_div(parent_rate, f, r * od);
>> +}
>> +
> ...
>
>> +
>> +static int k230_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +	int ret;
>> +	struct k230_sysclk *ksc;
>> +
>> +	ksc = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct k230_sysclk), GFP_KERNEL);
> you can use `sizeof(*ksc)` instead. same below.
OK, I get it.

And thanks for your review.