Re: [PATCH v6 0/5] clk: clock deregistration support

[Sylwester Nawrocki]

Hi Laurent,

On 10/28/2013 10:05 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
> On Tuesday 24 September 2013 23:38:44 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> > On 08/30/2013 04:53 PM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> > > This patch series implements clock deregistration in the common clock
> > > framework. Comparing to v5 it only includes further corrections of NULL
> > > clock handling.
[...]
> > ---------8<------------------
> >   From ca5963041aad67e31324cb5d4d5e2cfce1706d4f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> > From: Sylwester Nawrocki<s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 23:52:04 +0200
> > Subject: [PATCH] omap3isp: Pass NULL device pointer to clk_register()
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki<s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >    drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c |   15 ++++++++++-----
> >    drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.h |    1 +
> >    2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c
> > b/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c
> > index df3a0ec..d7f3c98 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/platform/omap3isp/isp.c
> > @@ -290,9 +290,11 @@ static int isp_xclk_init(struct isp_device *isp)
> >    	struct clk_init_data init;
> >    	unsigned int i;
> >
> > +	for (i = 0; i<  ARRAY_SIZE(isp->xclks); ++i)
> > +		isp->xclks[i] = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>
> I don't think you've compile-tested this :-)

Thank you for the comments. Yeah, I messed up this, I thought this part
got recompiled but it didn't. I've fixed this in the recently posted
patch.

> > +
> >    	for (i = 0; i<  ARRAY_SIZE(isp->xclks); ++i) {
> >    		struct isp_xclk *xclk =&isp->xclks[i];
> > -		struct clk *clk;
> >
> >    		xclk->isp = isp;
> >    		xclk->id = i == 0 ? ISP_XCLK_A : ISP_XCLK_B;
> > @@ -306,9 +308,9 @@ static int isp_xclk_init(struct isp_device *isp)
> >
> >    		xclk->hw.init =&init;
> >
> > -		clk = devm_clk_register(isp->dev,&xclk->hw);
> > -		if (IS_ERR(clk))
> > -			return PTR_ERR(clk);
> > +		xclk->clk = clk_register(NULL,&xclk->hw);
> > +		if (IS_ERR(xclk->clk))
> > +			return PTR_ERR(xclk->clk);
>
> This doesn't introduce any regression in the sense that it will trade a
> problem for another one, so I'm fine with it in the short. Could you add a
> small comment above the clk_register() call to explain why the first argument
> is NULL ?

I'm not entirely happy about doing something like that. Nevertheless I 
didn't
hear so far any better proposals and I guess it could be treated as a short
term modification while we're working on proper handling of those circular
references.

--
Thanks,
Sylwester
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/