[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250610-heavy-liberal-moose-dba76e@houat>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2025 18:20:36 +0200
From: Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>
To: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Alberto Ruiz <aruiz@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/10] clk: test: introduce helper to create a mock mux
On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 07:16:54PM -0400, Brian Masney wrote:
> Introduce a helper to create a mock mux to reduce code duplication.
> This also changes it so that the relevant clk_hws are registered with
> the kunit framework.
>
> Signed-off-by: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk_test.c | 141 ++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 52 insertions(+), 89 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk_test.c b/drivers/clk/clk_test.c
> index 1440eb3c41def8c549f92c0e95b2a472f3bdb4a7..147935975969f8da4a9365c0fac6ffe37e310933 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk_test.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk_test.c
> @@ -538,45 +538,64 @@ static struct kunit_suite clk_uncached_test_suite = {
> .test_cases = clk_uncached_test_cases,
> };
>
> -static int
> -clk_multiple_parents_mux_test_init(struct kunit *test)
> -{
> - struct clk_multiple_parent_ctx *ctx;
> - const char *parents[2] = { "parent-0", "parent-1"};
> +static int clk_init_multiple_parent_ctx(struct kunit *test,
> + struct clk_multiple_parent_ctx *ctx,
> + const char *parent0_name,
> + unsigned long parent0_rate,
> + const char *parent1_name,
> + unsigned long parent1_rate,
> + const char *mux_name, int mux_flags,
> + const struct clk_ops *mux_ops)
> +{
> + const struct clk_hw *parents[2];
> int ret;
>
> - ctx = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*ctx), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!ctx)
> - return -ENOMEM;
> - test->priv = ctx;
> -
> - ctx->parents_ctx[0].hw.init = CLK_HW_INIT_NO_PARENT("parent-0",
> + ctx->parents_ctx[0].hw.init = CLK_HW_INIT_NO_PARENT(parent0_name,
> &clk_dummy_rate_ops,
> 0);
> - ctx->parents_ctx[0].rate = DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_1;
> + ctx->parents_ctx[0].rate = parent0_rate;
> ret = clk_hw_register_kunit(test, NULL, &ctx->parents_ctx[0].hw);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - ctx->parents_ctx[1].hw.init = CLK_HW_INIT_NO_PARENT("parent-1",
> + ctx->parents_ctx[1].hw.init = CLK_HW_INIT_NO_PARENT(parent1_name,
> &clk_dummy_rate_ops,
> 0);
> - ctx->parents_ctx[1].rate = DUMMY_CLOCK_RATE_2;
> + ctx->parents_ctx[1].rate = parent1_rate;
> ret = clk_hw_register_kunit(test, NULL, &ctx->parents_ctx[1].hw);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - ctx->current_parent = 0;
> - ctx->hw.init = CLK_HW_INIT_PARENTS("test-mux", parents,
> - &clk_multiple_parents_mux_ops,
> - CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT);
> + parents[0] = &ctx->parents_ctx[0].hw;
> + parents[1] = &ctx->parents_ctx[1].hw;
> + ctx->hw.init = CLK_HW_INIT_PARENTS_HW(mux_name, parents,
> + mux_ops, mux_flags);
> ret = clk_hw_register_kunit(test, NULL, &ctx->hw);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> + ctx->current_parent = 0;
> +
> return 0;
> }
In this patch too, I'm wondering if we're not making it more complex
than it needs to be. I can see how small variations (like the parent
flags, or ops, or...) will all sound reasonable, but will turn this
allegedly simple function into a large, hard-to-parse, one
Maxime
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (274 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists