Re: [PATCH v6 03/13] clk: qcom: gdsc: Use PM clocks to control gdsc clocks

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 07/22/2015 12:10 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
@@ -104,6 +105,37 @@ static int gdsc_disable(struct generic_pm_domain *domain)
  	return gdsc_toggle_logic(sc, false);
  }
+static int gdsc_attach(struct generic_pm_domain *domain, struct device *dev)
+{
+	int ret;
+	struct gdsc *sc = domain_to_gdsc(domain);
+	char **con_id, *con_ids[] = { "core", "iface", NULL };

const?

This is where I get scared of sniffing too much SoC glue. What's to enforce the "core", and "iface" naming scheme? What's to enforce there being two clocks vs. one? Maybe a better approach would be to use of_clk_get() and iterate through all clocks of the device, or to encode the clock names in the gdsc structure.

The problem I'm getting at is that we're going through the consumer struct device's mapping of names to clks when we're inside this SoC glue code that has to know about what the consumer has decided to do. This code becomes tightly coupled with that decision that doesn't seem to be under the glue code's control. Using of_clk_get() sidesteps that problem, with the loss of flexibility of deciding which clock does what so at least it's a step in the right direction. But if we want to control individual clocks then we have to know which clock is which. Maybe we should associate clk_hw pointers with the gdscs and then export __clk_hw_create_clk() so that drivers can turn clk_hw pointers into clocks?

+
+	ret = pm_clk_create(dev);
+	if (ret) {
+		dev_err(dev, "pm_clk_create failed %d\n", ret);

Who cares? debug?

+		return ret;
+	}
+
+	for (con_id = con_ids; *con_id; con_id++) {
+		ret = pm_clk_add(dev, *con_id);
+		if (ret) {
+			dev_err(dev, "pm_clk_add failed %d\n", ret);

Who cares? debug?

+			goto fail;
+		}
+	}
+	return 0;
+fail:
+	pm_clk_destroy(dev);
+	return ret;
+};
+
+static void gdsc_detach(struct generic_pm_domain *domain, struct device *dev)
+{
+	pm_clk_destroy(dev);
+	return;

useless return

--
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 linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux