On Wed, Dec 28, 2022 at 10:35:55PM +0200, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> Switch _qcom_cc_register_board_clk() to use parent_hws.
>
There's more to this patch then this short sentence, please describe it
further.
And given Dan's reported-by, I must assume that there's an issue with
the current code. Is there a Fixes?
Regards,
Bjorn
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Properly fix the clock's parent data in case parent clock is present
> in the dtsi.
>
> ---
> drivers/clk/qcom/common.c | 11 +++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c
> index 75f09e6e057e..9f2bd37c9540 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c
> @@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ static int _qcom_cc_register_board_clk(struct device *dev, const char *path,
> struct device_node *node = NULL;
> struct device_node *clocks_node;
> struct clk_fixed_factor *factor;
> - struct clk_fixed_rate *fixed;
> + struct clk_fixed_rate *fixed = NULL;
> struct clk_init_data init_data = { };
> int ret;
>
> @@ -161,6 +161,8 @@ static int _qcom_cc_register_board_clk(struct device *dev, const char *path,
> of_node_put(node);
>
> if (add_factor) {
> + struct clk_parent_data parent_data;
> +
> factor = devm_kzalloc(dev, sizeof(*factor), GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!factor)
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -168,8 +170,13 @@ static int _qcom_cc_register_board_clk(struct device *dev, const char *path,
> factor->mult = factor->div = 1;
> factor->hw.init = &init_data;
>
> + if (fixed)
> + parent_data.hw = &fixed->hw;
> + else
> + parent_data.name = path;
> +
> init_data.name = name;
> - init_data.parent_names = &path;
> + init_data.parent_data = &parent_data;
> init_data.num_parents = 1;
> init_data.flags = 0;
> init_data.ops = &clk_fixed_factor_ops;
> --
> 2.39.0
>
