All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: David Lechner <david@lechnology.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
	Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>,
	Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: don't call __of_clk_get_by_name() unnecessarily from clk_get()
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:19:42 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <12e2aeb6-d1be-4c62-d48f-4d62b46dfc99@lechnology.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180212210053.GO9418@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>

On 02/12/2018 03:00 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 02:51:57PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
>> On 02/12/2018 08:24 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
>>>
>>> The way this function is implemented caused some confusion when
>>> converting the TI DaVinci platform to using the common clock framework.
>>>
>>> Current kernel supports booting DaVinci boards both in device tree as
>>> well as legacy, board-file mode. In the latter, we always end up
>>> calling clk_get_sys() as of_node is NULL and __of_clk_get_by_name()
>>> returns -ENOENT.
>>>
>>> It was not obvious at first glance how clk_get(dev, NULL) will work in
>>> board-file mode since we always call __of_clk_get_by_name(). Let's make
>>> it clearer by checking if of_node is NULL and skipping right to
>>> clk_get_sys().
>>>
>>> Cc: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
>>> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
>>> Cc: David Lechner <david@lechnology.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/clk/clkdev.c | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clkdev.c b/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
>>> index 7513411140b6..f394e8964909 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
>>> @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ struct clk *clk_get(struct device *dev, const char *con_id)
>>>   	const char *dev_id = dev ? dev_name(dev) : NULL;
>>>   	struct clk *clk;
>>> -	if (dev) {
>>> +	if (dev && dev->of_node) {
>>>   		clk = __of_clk_get_by_name(dev->of_node, dev_id, con_id);
>>>   		if (!IS_ERR(clk) || PTR_ERR(clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>   			return clk;
>>>
>>
>> Shouldn't you be sending this to the linux-clk mailing list and cc'ing
>> the clock maintainers?
> 
> No, I'm the maintainer for clkdev, as per MAINTAINERS.

Oops, I guess I should have looked before I said something.

> 
>> FWIW, it seems pretty clear to me that if we are using a board file
>> then we should expect clk_get_sys() to be called because there is
>> no device tree.
> 
> clk_get() pre-dates DT, and using it has no bearing on whether DT is
> in use or not.  The above change looks correct to me - if the
> struct device is not a DT device, then we shouldn't be trying to look
> up the clock in DT.
> 

Looks fine to me too.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: david@lechnology.com (David Lechner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] clk: don't call __of_clk_get_by_name() unnecessarily from clk_get()
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2018 15:19:42 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <12e2aeb6-d1be-4c62-d48f-4d62b46dfc99@lechnology.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180212210053.GO9418@n2100.armlinux.org.uk>

On 02/12/2018 03:00 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 02:51:57PM -0600, David Lechner wrote:
>> On 02/12/2018 08:24 AM, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
>>>
>>> The way this function is implemented caused some confusion when
>>> converting the TI DaVinci platform to using the common clock framework.
>>>
>>> Current kernel supports booting DaVinci boards both in device tree as
>>> well as legacy, board-file mode. In the latter, we always end up
>>> calling clk_get_sys() as of_node is NULL and __of_clk_get_by_name()
>>> returns -ENOENT.
>>>
>>> It was not obvious at first glance how clk_get(dev, NULL) will work in
>>> board-file mode since we always call __of_clk_get_by_name(). Let's make
>>> it clearer by checking if of_node is NULL and skipping right to
>>> clk_get_sys().
>>>
>>> Cc: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@ti.com>
>>> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@baylibre.com>
>>> Cc: David Lechner <david@lechnology.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@baylibre.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/clk/clkdev.c | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clkdev.c b/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
>>> index 7513411140b6..f394e8964909 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
>>> @@ -199,7 +199,7 @@ struct clk *clk_get(struct device *dev, const char *con_id)
>>>   	const char *dev_id = dev ? dev_name(dev) : NULL;
>>>   	struct clk *clk;
>>> -	if (dev) {
>>> +	if (dev && dev->of_node) {
>>>   		clk = __of_clk_get_by_name(dev->of_node, dev_id, con_id);
>>>   		if (!IS_ERR(clk) || PTR_ERR(clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>>   			return clk;
>>>
>>
>> Shouldn't you be sending this to the linux-clk mailing list and cc'ing
>> the clock maintainers?
> 
> No, I'm the maintainer for clkdev, as per MAINTAINERS.

Oops, I guess I should have looked before I said something.

> 
>> FWIW, it seems pretty clear to me that if we are using a board file
>> then we should expect clk_get_sys() to be called because there is
>> no device tree.
> 
> clk_get() pre-dates DT, and using it has no bearing on whether DT is
> in use or not.  The above change looks correct to me - if the
> struct device is not a DT device, then we shouldn't be trying to look
> up the clock in DT.
> 

Looks fine to me too.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-02-12 21:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-12 14:24 [PATCH] clk: don't call __of_clk_get_by_name() unnecessarily from clk_get() Bartosz Golaszewski
2018-02-12 14:24 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2018-02-12 20:51 ` David Lechner
2018-02-12 20:51   ` David Lechner
2018-02-12 21:00   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-02-12 21:00     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2018-02-12 21:19     ` David Lechner [this message]
2018-02-12 21:19       ` David Lechner
2018-03-19 15:42     ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2018-03-19 15:42       ` Bartosz Golaszewski

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=12e2aeb6-d1be-4c62-d48f-4d62b46dfc99@lechnology.com \
    --to=david@lechnology.com \
    --cc=bgolaszewski@baylibre.com \
    --cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
    --cc=khilman@baylibre.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=nsekhar@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.