Hi Frank,
Am Mittwoch, 25. September 2024, 03:42:35 CEST schrieb frawang:
> >> @@ -376,6 +378,7 @@ rockchip_usb2phy_clk480m_register(struct rockchip_usb2phy *rphy)
> >> {
> >> struct device_node *node = rphy->dev->of_node;
> >> struct clk_init_data init;
> >> + struct clk *refclk = of_clk_get_by_name(node, "phyclk");
> > Doesn't this create an imbalance - with the missing put?
> > I think ideally just define clk_bulk_data structs for the
> > 1-clock and 3-clock variant, attach that to the device-data
> > and then use the regular devm_clk_bulk_get ?
> >
> > That way you can then retrieve the clock from that struct?
>
> How about keep the clk_bulk_data and num_clks member in rockchip_usb2phy
> structs, and retrieve the clock by "clks.id" here?
> Just like the following codes.
>
> @@ -378,8 +378,9 @@ rockchip_usb2phy_clk480m_register(struct
> rockchip_usb2phy *rphy)
> {
> struct device_node *node = rphy->dev->of_node;
> struct clk_init_data init;
> - struct clk *refclk = of_clk_get_by_name(node, "phyclk");
> + struct clk *refclk = NULL;
> const char *clk_name;
> + int i;
> int ret = 0;
>
> init.flags = 0;
> @@ -389,6 +390,13 @@ rockchip_usb2phy_clk480m_register(struct
> rockchip_usb2phy *rphy)
> /* optional override of the clockname */
> of_property_read_string(node, "clock-output-names", &init.name);
>
> + for (i = 0; i < rphy->num_clks; i++) {
> + if (!strncmp(rphy->clks[i].id, "phyclk", 6)) {
> + refclk = rphy->clks[i].clk;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
this is exactly what I had in mind :-)
Thanks
Heiko
