Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] clk: lan966x: Extend lan966x clock driver for clock gating support

[Stephen Boyd]

Quoting Horatiu Vultur (2021-10-29 02:35:56)
> The 10/28/2021 23:41, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> 
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> > 
> > Quoting Horatiu Vultur (2021-10-19 01:44:49)
> > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-lan966x.c b/drivers/clk/clk-lan966x.c
> > > index 19bec94e1551..40be47092a31 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-lan966x.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-lan966x.c
> > > @@ -188,26 +202,64 @@ static struct clk_hw *lan966x_gck_clk_register(struct device *dev, int i)
> > >         return &priv->hw;
> > >  };
> > >
> > > +static int lan966x_gate_clk_register(struct device *dev,
> > > +                                    struct clk_hw_onecell_data *hw_data,
> > > +                                    void __iomem *gate_base)
> > > +{
> > > +       int i;
> > > +
> > > +       for (i = GCK_GATE_UHPHS; i < N_CLOCKS; ++i) {
> > > +               int idx = i - GCK_GATE_UHPHS;
> > > +
> > > +               hw_data->hws[i] =
> > > +                       clk_hw_register_gate(dev, clk_gate_desc[idx].name,
> > 
> > Use devm?
> 
> I couldn't find any devm_clk_hw_register_gate or something similar for
> the gate.

Add one?

> 
> > 
> > > +                                            "lan966x", 0, base,
> > > +                                            clk_gate_desc[idx].bit_idx,
> > > +                                            0, &clk_gate_lock);
> > > +
> > > +               if (IS_ERR(hw_data->hws[i]))
> > > +                       return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(hw_data->hws[i]),
> > > +                                            "failed to register %s clock\n",
> > > +                                            clk_gate_desc[idx].name);
> > > +       }
> > > +
> > > +       return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void lan966x_gate_clk_unregister(struct clk_hw_onecell_data *hw_data)
> > > +{
> > > +       int i;
> > > +
> > > +       for (i = GCK_GATE_UHPHS; i < N_CLOCKS; ++i)
> > 
> > for (int i =
> > 
> > should suffice
> 
> That would not work. I will get the error:
> error: ‘for’ loop initial declarations are only allowed in C99 or C11 mode

Ah ok