From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933222AbcKVVjF (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 16:39:05 -0500 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:41294 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932488AbcKVVjC (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Nov 2016 16:39:02 -0500 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.1 smtp.codeaurora.org 636DB6135C Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sboyd@codeaurora.org Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 13:39:00 -0800 From: Stephen Boyd To: Georgi Djakov Cc: mturquette@baylibre.com, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, michael.scott@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: qcom: clk-smd-rpm: Fix clk_hw_onecell_data references Message-ID: <20161122213900.GB25626@codeaurora.org> References: <20161121140450.12353-1-georgi.djakov@linaro.org> <20161121231312.GZ25626@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 11/22, Georgi Djakov wrote: > On 11/22/2016 01:13 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >On 11/21, Georgi Djakov wrote: > >>The clk_hw_onecell_data struct is missing references to the > >>actual clocks. Fix this. > >> > >>Reported-by: Michael Scott > >>Signed-off-by: Georgi Djakov > >>--- > >> drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c | 20 +++++++++----------- > >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-) > >> > >>diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c > >>index a27013dbc0aa..58821f7213b0 100644 > >>--- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c > >>+++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c > >>@@ -148,8 +148,7 @@ struct clk_smd_rpm_req { > >> > >> struct rpm_cc { > >> struct qcom_rpm *rpm; > >>- struct clk_hw_onecell_data data; > >>- struct clk_hw *hws[]; > >>+ struct clk_hw_onecell_data *data; > > > >How about rolling our own xlate function to return hw pointers? > >We already have a list of hws here, so it doesn't seem like much > >more to do. > > We could do this, but is there any benefit of adding and using our own > xlate function instead of the of_clk_hw_onecell_get, which is already > there? Maybe I'm missing something..? > Yes, the benefit is reusing the static array of rpm clocks that already exist. In a sense, we already have the hw_onecell_data array in those list of clocks. Now we just need to implement the function to return them to the framework when the appropriate identifier is requested. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project