From: Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@nvidia.com>
To: Hiroshi Doyu <hdoyu@nvidia.com>
Cc: "mturquette@linaro.org" <mturquette@linaro.org>,
"sboyd@codeaurora.org" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
"swarren@wwwdotorg.org" <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org>,
"t.figa@samsung.com" <t.figa@samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] clk: Add composite clock type
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 15:22:54 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <511227F6.3050601@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130206.081048.71241785637713947.hdoyu@nvidia.com>
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 11:40 AM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
> Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@nvidia.com> wrote @ Wed, 6 Feb 2013 03:55:00 +0100:
>
>>>> No, clk_ops depends on the clocks you are using. There could be a clock
>>>> with mux and gate while another one with mux and div.
>>> You are right. What about the following? We don't have to have similar
>>> copy of clk_composite_ops for each instances.
>> Clock framework takes decision depending on the ops availability and it
>> does not know if the clock is mux or gate.
>>
>> For example,
>>
>> if (clk->ops->enable) {
>> ret = clk->ops->enable(clk->hw);
>> if (ret) {
>> __clk_disable(clk->parent);
>> return ret;
>> }
>> }
>>
>> in above case if clk_composite does not have gate clock then as per your
>> suggestion if it returns error value then it will fail and it is wrong.
> Ok, now I understand. Thank you for explanation.
>
> We always need to allocate clk_composite_ops for each clk_composite,
> right? If so what about having "struct clk_ops ops" in "struct
> clk_composite"?
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> index f30fb4b..5240e24 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> @@ -129,20 +129,13 @@ struct clk *clk_register_composite(struct device *dev, const char *name,
> pr_err("%s: could not allocate composite clk\n", __func__);
> return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> }
> + clk_composite_ops = &composite->ops;
>
> init.name = name;
> init.flags = flags | CLK_IS_BASIC;
> init.parent_names = parent_names;
> init.num_parents = num_parents;
>
> - /* allocate the clock ops */
> - clk_composite_ops = kzalloc(sizeof(*clk_composite_ops), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!clk_composite_ops) {
> - pr_err("%s: could not allocate clk ops\n", __func__);
> - kfree(composite);
> - return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> - }
> -
> if (mux_hw && mux_ops) {
> if (!mux_ops->get_parent || !mux_ops->set_parent) {
> clk = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> @@ -202,7 +195,6 @@ struct clk *clk_register_composite(struct device *dev, const char *name,
> return clk;
>
> err:
> - kfree(clk_composite_ops);
> kfree(composite);
> return clk;
> }
> diff --git a/include/linux/clk-provider.h b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> index f0ac818..bb5d36a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> @@ -346,6 +346,8 @@ struct clk_composite {
> const struct clk_ops *mux_ops;
> const struct clk_ops *div_ops;
> const struct clk_ops *gate_ops;
> +
> + const struct clk_ops ops;
> };
>
> struct clk *clk_register_composite(struct device *dev, const char *name,
This will work, but there is no harm in allocating dynamically. What is
preferred?
>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
>>> index f30fb4b..8f88805 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
>>> @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@ static u8 clk_composite_get_parent(struct clk_hw *hw)
>>> const struct clk_ops *mux_ops = composite->mux_ops;
>>> struct clk_hw *mux_hw = composite->mux_hw;
>>>
>>> + if (!mux_hw->clk)
>>> + return -EINVAL;
>>> +
>>> mux_hw->clk = hw->clk;
>> It is wrong.
> Will the above "mux_hw->clk = hw->clk" be removed from the original?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-06 9:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-04 8:11 [PATCH V2] clk: Add composite clock type Prashant Gaikwad
2013-02-04 9:37 ` Hiroshi Doyu
2013-02-05 8:33 ` Prashant Gaikwad
2013-02-05 10:22 ` Hiroshi Doyu
2013-02-05 10:38 ` Tomasz Figa
2013-02-05 11:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-02-06 2:55 ` Prashant Gaikwad
2013-02-06 6:10 ` Hiroshi Doyu
2013-02-06 9:52 ` Prashant Gaikwad [this message]
2013-02-06 10:00 ` Hiroshi Doyu
2013-02-06 10:02 ` Tomasz Figa
2013-02-05 10:15 ` Tomasz Figa
2013-02-06 3:04 ` Prashant Gaikwad
2013-02-06 10:06 ` Tomasz Figa
2013-02-28 7:58 ` Prashant Gaikwad
2013-02-28 18:20 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-13 16:30 ` Tomasz Figa
2013-03-19 12:04 ` Prashant Gaikwad
2013-02-05 10:50 ` Hiroshi Doyu
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=511227F6.3050601@nvidia.com \
--to=pgaikwad@nvidia.com \
--cc=hdoyu@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mturquette@linaro.org \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=swarren@wwwdotorg.org \
--cc=t.figa@samsung.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).