Quoting Ricardo Salveti (2018-09-14 11:53:02) > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 6:55 PM <ilia.lin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > From: Ilia Lin <ilialin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Use devm_clk_hw_register instead of clk_hw_register > > to simplify the usage of this API. This way drivers that call > > the clk_hw_register_fixed_factor won't need to maintain > > a data structure for further cleanup. > > > > Signed-off-by: Ilia Lin <ilialin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Tested-by: Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c b/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c > > index a5d402de5584..8e39bda8e596 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-fixed-factor.c > > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ struct clk_hw *clk_hw_register_fixed_factor(struct device *dev, > > init.num_parents = 1; > > > > hw = &fix->hw; > > - ret = clk_hw_register(dev, hw); > > + ret = devm_clk_hw_register(dev, hw); > > Not sure what is the current state of this patch-set, but this change > breaks drivers calling clk_hw_register_fixed_factor with a NULL dev > (e.g. imx_clk_fixed_factor), as devm_clk_hw_register needs a valid dev > for devres_add to work. > Yep. Probably better to just have a driver register the clk_hw structure itself with the clk framework vs. trying to get it right here in the generic type registration function.
