From: Dong Aisheng <dongas86@gmail.com> To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> Cc: Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, shawnguo@kernel.org, s.nawrocki@samsung.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 1/1] clk: bulk: add of_clk_bulk_get() Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 10:51:47 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20171222025147.GB24403@b29396-OptiPlex-7040> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20171221232032.GD7997@codeaurora.org> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 03:20:32PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 12/20, Dong Aisheng wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 03:48:21PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > On 09/26, Dong Aisheng wrote: > > > > here to handle this for DT users without 'clock-names' specified. > > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > void clk_bulk_put(int num_clks, struct clk_bulk_data *clks) > > > > { > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/clk.h b/include/linux/clk.h > > > > index 12c96d9..073cb3b 100644 > > > > --- a/include/linux/clk.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/clk.h > > > > @@ -680,10 +680,18 @@ static inline void clk_bulk_disable_unprepare(int num_clks, > > > > } > > > > > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_OF) && defined(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) > > > > +int __must_check of_clk_bulk_get(struct device_node *np, int num_clks, > > > > + struct clk_bulk_data *clks); > > > > struct clk *of_clk_get(struct device_node *np, int index); > > > > struct clk *of_clk_get_by_name(struct device_node *np, const char *name); > > > > struct clk *of_clk_get_from_provider(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec); > > > > #else > > > > +static inline int of_clk_bulk_get(struct device_node *np, int num_clks, > > > > > > Do we need __must_check here too? > > > > Yes, you're absolutely right. > > > > of_clk_bulk_get is special as it returns error, so should add __must_check. > > > > > We should do the same for the > > > other bulk get APIs. Seems we missed that part last time. > > > > > > > Currently for !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK case, all APIs return 0. > > !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK > > clk_bulk_get return 0 > > devm_clk_bulk_get return 0 > > clk_bulk_enable return 0 > > clk_bulk_prepare return 0 > > > > Do you think we still need add __must_check for them? > > Yes, we need it even when !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK because it allows us > to catch missing checking return values in the non-clk compile > configurations too. More test coverage. > Ok, understand. May cook a patch to fix them. > > > > And for CONFIG_HAVE_CLK case, all __must_check already added. > > > > int __must_check clk_bulk_get > > int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get > > int __must_check clk_bulk_enable > > int __must_check clk_bulk_prepare > > > > And no need for void function. > > void clk_bulk_put > > void clk_bulk_unprepare > > void clk_bulk_disable > > > > > I'll fix all these things up when applying. > > > > > > > I did not see this in latest tree. > > Suppose i should resend it with above things fixed, right? > > > > I dropped it because it seems like maybe we don't need > of_clk_bulk_get(), but more like clk_get_all() or something like > that to acquire all clks for a device. It seems like it isn't DT > specific, and so we should just provide the "all" API instead of > some DT specific one that needs to know how many clks to get. I > think I sent a similar reply on some other thread and added you > to it. > I probably missed it before. Will check later. Thanks for reminder. Regards Dong Aisheng
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: dongas86@gmail.com (Dong Aisheng) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH V4 1/1] clk: bulk: add of_clk_bulk_get() Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 10:51:47 +0800 [thread overview] Message-ID: <20171222025147.GB24403@b29396-OptiPlex-7040> (raw) In-Reply-To: <20171221232032.GD7997@codeaurora.org> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 03:20:32PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 12/20, Dong Aisheng wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 03:48:21PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > On 09/26, Dong Aisheng wrote: > > > > here to handle this for DT users without 'clock-names' specified. > > > > > > +#endif > > > > > > > > void clk_bulk_put(int num_clks, struct clk_bulk_data *clks) > > > > { > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/clk.h b/include/linux/clk.h > > > > index 12c96d9..073cb3b 100644 > > > > --- a/include/linux/clk.h > > > > +++ b/include/linux/clk.h > > > > @@ -680,10 +680,18 @@ static inline void clk_bulk_disable_unprepare(int num_clks, > > > > } > > > > > > > > #if defined(CONFIG_OF) && defined(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK) > > > > +int __must_check of_clk_bulk_get(struct device_node *np, int num_clks, > > > > + struct clk_bulk_data *clks); > > > > struct clk *of_clk_get(struct device_node *np, int index); > > > > struct clk *of_clk_get_by_name(struct device_node *np, const char *name); > > > > struct clk *of_clk_get_from_provider(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec); > > > > #else > > > > +static inline int of_clk_bulk_get(struct device_node *np, int num_clks, > > > > > > Do we need __must_check here too? > > > > Yes, you're absolutely right. > > > > of_clk_bulk_get is special as it returns error, so should add __must_check. > > > > > We should do the same for the > > > other bulk get APIs. Seems we missed that part last time. > > > > > > > Currently for !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK case, all APIs return 0. > > !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK > > clk_bulk_get return 0 > > devm_clk_bulk_get return 0 > > clk_bulk_enable return 0 > > clk_bulk_prepare return 0 > > > > Do you think we still need add __must_check for them? > > Yes, we need it even when !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK because it allows us > to catch missing checking return values in the non-clk compile > configurations too. More test coverage. > Ok, understand. May cook a patch to fix them. > > > > And for CONFIG_HAVE_CLK case, all __must_check already added. > > > > int __must_check clk_bulk_get > > int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get > > int __must_check clk_bulk_enable > > int __must_check clk_bulk_prepare > > > > And no need for void function. > > void clk_bulk_put > > void clk_bulk_unprepare > > void clk_bulk_disable > > > > > I'll fix all these things up when applying. > > > > > > > I did not see this in latest tree. > > Suppose i should resend it with above things fixed, right? > > > > I dropped it because it seems like maybe we don't need > of_clk_bulk_get(), but more like clk_get_all() or something like > that to acquire all clks for a device. It seems like it isn't DT > specific, and so we should just provide the "all" API instead of > some DT specific one that needs to know how many clks to get. I > think I sent a similar reply on some other thread and added you > to it. > I probably missed it before. Will check later. Thanks for reminder. Regards Dong Aisheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-22 2:52 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2017-09-26 8:44 [PATCH V4 1/1] clk: bulk: add of_clk_bulk_get() Dong Aisheng 2017-09-26 8:44 ` Dong Aisheng 2017-09-29 22:48 ` Stephen Boyd 2017-09-29 22:48 ` Stephen Boyd 2017-12-20 13:53 ` Dong Aisheng 2017-12-20 13:53 ` Dong Aisheng 2017-12-21 23:20 ` Stephen Boyd 2017-12-21 23:20 ` Stephen Boyd 2017-12-22 2:51 ` Dong Aisheng [this message] 2017-12-22 2:51 ` Dong Aisheng
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=20171222025147.GB24403@b29396-OptiPlex-7040 \ --to=dongas86@gmail.com \ --cc=aisheng.dong@nxp.com \ --cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \ --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \ --cc=s.nawrocki@samsung.com \ --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \ --cc=shawnguo@kernel.org \ /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: linkBe 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.