Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] clk: core: link consumer with clock driver

From: Miquel Raynal
Date: Mon Dec 17 2018 - 09:24:40 EST


Hi Stephen,

Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote on Tue, 11 Dec 2018 09:12:55
-0800:

> Sorry, I'm not reviewing the whole patch right now, just this one little
> bit because I'm also working in the same area.
>
> Quoting Miquel Raynal (2018-12-04 11:24:38)
> > diff --git a/include/linux/clk-provider.h b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > index 60c51871b04b..721d6b55b2fa 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > @@ -781,6 +781,8 @@ void devm_clk_hw_unregister(struct device *dev, struct clk_hw *hw);
> > const char *__clk_get_name(const struct clk *clk);
> > const char *clk_hw_get_name(const struct clk_hw *hw);
> > struct clk_hw *__clk_get_hw(struct clk *clk);
> > +void clk_link_consumer(struct device *consumer, struct clk *clk);
> > +void clk_unlink_consumer(struct clk *clk);
>
> We shouldn't need to add these functions as far as I can tell. That's
> because __clk_get() has become an internal API between clkdev.c and
> clk.c that does nothing now on implementations that aren't the CCF. We
> can even change this API to take a clk_hw pointer instead of a clk
> pointer.
>
> I'd rather see us plumb a struct device and clk_hw structure down into
> __clk_get() and fold it all into __clk_create_clk, possibly even
> renaming __clk_create_clk to clk_hw_create_clk(). That way we can get
> the calling device and clk_hw pointer in one call in the clk framework,
> along with the device name and connection name, and then generate the
> struct clk right there. This can simplify some code and make it easier
> to extend this to associate calling devices with the clk consumer
> somehow.
>
> Here's the diff. With this, you should be able to add and remove device
> links in clk_hw_create_clk() when dev != NULL.

Thanks for the pointers, if you think we should modify the API then
it's fine by me, I will integrate your diff and try to propose
something in sync with your comments this week.

Thanks,
MiquÃl