linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] riscv: dts: eswin: Add clock driver 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4b4f0bbb-c0bd-49c7-a75f-cee71bbd0002@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2025 11:02:02 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: 董绪洋 <dongxuyang@...incomputing.com>,
 mturquette@...libre.com, sboyd@...nel.org, robh@...nel.org,
 krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 paul.walmsley@...ive.com, palmer@...belt.com, aou@...s.berkeley.edu,
 alex@...ti.fr, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: ningyu@...incomputing.com, linmin@...incomputing.com,
 huangyifeng@...incomputing.com, pinkesh.vaghela@...fochips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/3] riscv: dts: eswin: Add clock driver support

On 21/08/2025 10:45, 董绪洋 wrote:
>>>>> +		/* fixed clock */
>>>>> +		fixed_rate_clk_apll_fout2: fixed-rate-apll-fout2 {
>>>>
>>>> Such pattern was years ago NAKed.
>>>>
>>>> No, don't ever bring nodes per clock.
>>>>
>>> We have defined a large number of clock devices. 
>>> The comment of v3 is "Driver is also way too big for simple clock driver and I 
>>> am surprised to see so many redundancies.". Therefore, we modified the clock 
>>> driver code and moved the description of clock device from the driver to the DTS.
>>>
>>> But, this comment is that don't ever bring nodes per clock. We’ve run into some
>>
>> And? What is unclear in that comment?
>>
>>> trouble and aren’t sure which approach aligns better with community guidelines. 
>>> Could you share your advice or suggestions on the best way forward?
>>
>> Look at any other recent clock drivers.
> 
> I found out that the recent clock drivers, such as sophgo/clk-sg2044.c 
> and rockchip/clk-rk3562.c, the clock tree information of them was placed
> in the C code. 
> So, for EIC7700 SoC, should the clock tree information be placed in
> clk-eic7700.c just as clk-sg2044.c? Is this understanding correct?

Yes, entire clock hierarchy for one clock controller should be coded in
the Linux driver. How do you name it or how do you split your drivers to
code it efficiently, is different topic.


Best regards,
Krzysztof