On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 5:10 PM Dmitry Baryshkov
<dmitry.baryshkov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 7 Oct 2023 at 00:41, Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Use preferred device_get_match_data() instead of of_match_device() to
> > get the driver match data. With this, adjust the includes to explicitly
> > include the correct headers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/clk/clk-lochnagar.c | 9 ++-------
> > drivers/clk/davinci/da8xx-cfgchip.c | 8 +++-----
> > drivers/clk/davinci/pll.c | 10 +++-------
> > drivers/clk/davinci/psc.c | 10 +++-------
> > drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-msm8960.c | 13 +++++--------
> > drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-msm8974.c | 10 +++-------
> > drivers/clk/qcom/kpss-xcc.c | 9 ++-------
> > drivers/clk/qcom/krait-cc.c | 14 +++++---------
> > drivers/clk/qcom/mmcc-msm8960.c | 16 +++++-----------
> > drivers/clk/qcom/mmcc-sdm660.c | 8 ++------
> > drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c | 9 ++-------
> > drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos-clkout.c | 8 +++-----
> > drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c | 14 ++++----------
> > 13 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 96 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/mmcc-msm8960.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/mmcc-msm8960.c
> > index 6bf908a51f53..50638ab341ec 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/mmcc-msm8960.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/mmcc-msm8960.c
> > @@ -8,9 +8,9 @@
> > #include <linux/err.h>
> > #include <linux/delay.h>
> > #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> > +#include <linux/property.h>
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > #include <linux/of.h>
> > -#include <linux/of_device.h>
> > #include <linux/clk.h>
> > #include <linux/clk-provider.h>
> > #include <linux/regmap.h>
> > @@ -3105,30 +3105,24 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, mmcc_msm8960_match_table);
> >
> > static int mmcc_msm8960_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > {
> > - const struct of_device_id *match;
> > struct regmap *regmap;
> > - bool is_8064;
> > struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > + const struct qcom_cc_desc *desc = device_get_match_data(dev);
> >
> > - match = of_match_device(mmcc_msm8960_match_table, dev);
> > - if (!match)
> > - return -EINVAL;
> > -
> > - is_8064 = of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "qcom,mmcc-apq8064");
>
> Can we please keep of_device_is_compatible here? It is more explicit
> and self-documenting.
Why do we need to match 3 times (match, device_get_match_data,
of_device_is_compatible)?
Perhaps put it in the match data? Or make a helper function is_8064()
that does the comparison to the match data?
> Also, it would be really nice to have per-platform patches, so that
> our maintainers can pick them, otherwise the risk of conflicts is
> pretty high.
No.
I'm doing this treewide. It's already pretty unmanageable. But feel
free to submit a separate patch if you prefer to this for QCom. When I
split things up by sub-arch, then I also have to spend time chasing
down non-responsive maintainers.
Rob
