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

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Miquel Raynal (2019-01-04 07:54:06)
> 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 help; I updated my work on top of yours, it looks ok but
> I need to run some more tests.
> 
> However I had to tweak a parameter in one of your recent changes, you
> used '-1' as index in __of_clock_get() while it is not a valid value
> (returning an error). As in the __of_clk_get_by_name() function you
> removed index was just set to 0 at the top of the function, I think the
> below fix is valid.

Thanks. Makes sense so I folded it in.