On 03/23, Maxime Ripard wrote: > The composite clock didn't have any unregistration function, which forced > us to use clk_unregister directly on it. > > While it was already not great from an API point of view, it also meant > that we were leaking the clk_composite structure allocated in > clk_register_composite. > > Add a clk_unregister_composite function to fix this. > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- I'm currently attempting to change the way clks are registered so that we don't return clk pointers from clk_register and have users add OF clk providers that return clk_hw pointers instead of clk pointers. Just a note, that this whole thing should be deleted in the next cycle if I can convert everything! > drivers/clk/clk-composite.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > include/linux/clk-provider.h | 1 + > 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c > index 1f903e1f86a2..b0f3b84ebd13 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c > @@ -286,3 +286,18 @@ err: > kfree(composite); > return clk; > } > + > +void clk_unregister_composite(struct clk *clk) > +{ > + struct clk_composite *composite; > + struct clk_hw *hw; > + > + hw = __clk_get_hw(clk); > + if (!hw) > + return; > + > + composite = to_clk_composite(hw); > + > + clk_unregister(clk); > + kfree(composite); > +} EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL? Do I need to pick this up? -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html