netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: qcom/emac: don't try to claim clocks on ACPI systems

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: <d6683e1c-803d-3859-f125-93fecaa0df02@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Dec 2016 13:46:31 -0800
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Christopher Covington <cov@...eaurora.org>,
        alokc@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: qcom/emac: don't try to claim clocks on ACPI systems

On 12/13/2016 11:55 AM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On ACPI systems, clocks are not available to drivers directly.  They are
> handled exclusively by ACPI and/or firmware, so there is no clock driver.
> Calls to clk_get() always fail, so we should not even attempt to claim
> any clocks on ACPI systems.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/emac/emac.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/emac/emac.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/emac/emac.c
> index ae32f85..b1c1cdc 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/emac/emac.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/qualcomm/emac/emac.c
> @@ -627,11 +627,12 @@ static int emac_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto err_undo_netdev;
>  
> -	/* initialize clocks */
> -	ret = emac_clks_phase1_init(pdev, adpt);
> -	if (ret) {
> -		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "could not initialize clocks\n");
> -		goto err_undo_netdev;
> +	if (!has_acpi_companion(&pdev->dev)) {

Is there a reason why the check is not moved down inwo
emac_clks_phase{1,2}_init functions? Do you anticipate other
ACPI-related changes in the future that would warrant having this check
moved at a higher level?
-- 
Florian