Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] cpufreq: qoriq: Don't look at clock implementation details

[Scott Wood <oss@buserror.net>]

On Thu, 2016-07-07 at 19:26 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Scott Wood (2016-07-06 21:13:23)
> > 
> > On Wed, 2016-07-06 at 18:30 -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> > > 
> > > Quoting Scott Wood (2016-06-15 23:21:25)
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > -static struct device_node *cpu_to_clk_node(int cpu)
> > > > +static struct clk *cpu_to_clk(int cpu)
> > > >  {
> > > > -       struct device_node *np, *clk_np;
> > > > +       struct device_node *np;
> > > > +       struct clk *clk;
> > > >  
> > > >         if (!cpu_present(cpu))
> > > >                 return NULL;
> > > > @@ -112,37 +80,28 @@ static struct device_node *cpu_to_clk_node(int
> > > > cpu)
> > > >         if (!np)
> > > >                 return NULL;
> > > >  
> > > > -       clk_np = of_parse_phandle(np, "clocks", 0);
> > > > -       if (!clk_np)
> > > > -               return NULL;
> > > > -
> > > > +       clk = of_clk_get(np, 0);
> > > Why not use devm_clk_get here?
> > devm_clk_get() is a wrapper around clk_get() which is not the same as
> > of_clk_get().  What device would you pass to devm_clk_get(), and what name
> > would you pass?
> I'm fuzzy on whether or not you get a struct device from a cpufreq
> driver. If so, then that would be the one to use. I would hope that
> cpufreq drivers model cpus as devices, but I'm really not sure without
> looking into the code.

It's not the cpufreq code that provides it, but get_cpu_device() could be
used.

Do you have any comments on the first patch of this set?

-Scott