linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 05/19] clk: at91: sama7d65: Use highest PMC definition as max index

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: <fac4b0b0-3aa1-4a7a-b578-2406bee5b4a9@tuxon.dev>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 17:45:05 +0200
From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>
To: Alexander Dahl <ada@...rsis.com>
Cc: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...rochip.com>,
 Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
 Ryan Wanner <ryan.wanner@...rochip.com>,
 linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
 Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
 <sboyd@...nel.org>, Cristian Birsan <cristian.birsan@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 05/19] clk: at91: sama7d65: Use highest PMC definition
 as max index



On 1/20/26 16:37, Alexander Dahl wrote:
> Consistent with all the other at91 clock drivers now, which also use the
> highest PMC definition as max value, and no extra number.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Dahl <ada@...rsis.com>
> ---
> 
> Notes:
>      v3:
>      - new patch, not present in v2
> 
>   drivers/clk/at91/sama7d65.c | 4 +---
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/sama7d65.c b/drivers/clk/at91/sama7d65.c
> index f6f86261ceefd..4ccffa8db43a5 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/at91/sama7d65.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/sama7d65.c
> @@ -19,8 +19,6 @@ static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pmc_pll_lock);
>   static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pmc_mck0_lock);
>   static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(pmc_mckX_lock);
>   
> -#define PMC_INDEX_MAX	25

That's not the right approach.

You should identify all the core clocks as described in the HW manual and 
allocate the ncore section of sama7d65_pmc[] to have all those fit in there. 
This driver would have to work with old and new device trees and thus, if you 
shrink it now you wouldn't satisfy this rule in the future.

> -
>   /*
>    * PLL clocks identifiers
>    * @PLL_ID_CPU:		CPU PLL identifier
> @@ -1120,7 +1118,7 @@ static void __init sama7d65_pmc_setup(struct device_node *np)
>   	if (IS_ERR(regmap))
>   		return;
>   
> -	sama7d65_pmc = pmc_data_allocate(PMC_INDEX_MAX,
> +	sama7d65_pmc = pmc_data_allocate(SAMA7D65_PMC_MCK5 + 1,
>   					 nck(sama7d65_systemck),
>   					 nck(sama7d65_periphck),
>   					 nck(sama7d65_gck), 8);