From: Stepan Moskovchenko <stepanm@codeaurora.org>
To: Trilok Soni <tsoni@codeaurora.org>
Cc: davidb@codeaurora.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] msm: iommu: Rework clock logic and add IOMMU bus clock control
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:09:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D6828B5.6050608@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D675A42.9090803@codeaurora.org>
On 2/24/2011 11:29 PM, Trilok Soni wrote:
> Hi Steve,
Hello
>> @@ -130,117 +131,134 @@ static int msm_iommu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> struct resource *r, *r2;
>> struct clk *iommu_clk;
>> + struct clk *iommu_pclk;
>> struct msm_iommu_drvdata *drvdata;
>> struct msm_iommu_dev *iommu_dev = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> const please.
>
I am not clear on what you mean. Please be more specific here.
>> + iommu_pclk = clk_get(NULL, "smmu_pclk");
>> + if (IS_ERR(iommu_pclk)) {
>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>> + goto fail;
>> + }
> I am not a big fan of this when you have the "device" around. You should just do
>
> iommu_pclk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
>
> ...error logic...
>
> iommu_clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "iommu_clk");
>
> ...error logic...
>
The pclk is a "special" bus clock and does not have a specific device
instance associated with it, so passing a device would not be
appropriate in this case. I pass the device for other clocks that are
indeed associated with devices, but this is not one of them. I suppose
we could create 11 or 12 aliases for the pclk and associate it with all
the IOMMU devices, but I would prefer to avoid doing that as I believe
the current approach is cleaner.
>> - ret = -EBUSY;
>> - goto fail;
>> - }
>> + len = r->end - r->start + 1;
>
> resource_size please.
>
Ok
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: stepanm@codeaurora.org (Stepan Moskovchenko)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/4] msm: iommu: Rework clock logic and add IOMMU bus clock control
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 14:09:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D6828B5.6050608@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D675A42.9090803@codeaurora.org>
On 2/24/2011 11:29 PM, Trilok Soni wrote:
> Hi Steve,
Hello
>> @@ -130,117 +131,134 @@ static int msm_iommu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> {
>> struct resource *r, *r2;
>> struct clk *iommu_clk;
>> + struct clk *iommu_pclk;
>> struct msm_iommu_drvdata *drvdata;
>> struct msm_iommu_dev *iommu_dev = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> const please.
>
I am not clear on what you mean. Please be more specific here.
>> + iommu_pclk = clk_get(NULL, "smmu_pclk");
>> + if (IS_ERR(iommu_pclk)) {
>> + ret = -ENODEV;
>> + goto fail;
>> + }
> I am not a big fan of this when you have the "device" around. You should just do
>
> iommu_pclk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
>
> ...error logic...
>
> iommu_clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "iommu_clk");
>
> ...error logic...
>
The pclk is a "special" bus clock and does not have a specific device
instance associated with it, so passing a device would not be
appropriate in this case. I pass the device for other clocks that are
indeed associated with devices, but this is not one of them. I suppose
we could create 11 or 12 aliases for the pclk and associate it with all
the IOMMU devices, but I would prefer to avoid doing that as I believe
the current approach is cleaner.
>> - ret = -EBUSY;
>> - goto fail;
>> - }
>> + len = r->end - r->start + 1;
>
> resource_size please.
>
Ok
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-02-25 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-02-25 2:00 [PATCH 1/4] msm: iommu: Clock control for the IOMMU driver Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-25 2:00 ` Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-25 2:00 ` [PATCH 2/4] msm: iommu: Rework clock logic and add IOMMU bus clock control Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-25 2:00 ` Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-25 7:29 ` Trilok Soni
2011-02-25 7:29 ` Trilok Soni
2011-02-25 22:09 ` Stepan Moskovchenko [this message]
2011-02-25 22:09 ` Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-28 12:13 ` Trilok Soni
2011-02-28 12:13 ` Trilok Soni
2011-03-01 0:03 ` [PATCH v2 " Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-03-01 0:03 ` Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-03-01 7:15 ` Trilok Soni
2011-03-01 7:15 ` Trilok Soni
2011-02-25 2:00 ` [PATCH 3/4] msm: iommu: Use ASID tagging instead of VMID tagging Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-25 2:00 ` Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-25 2:00 ` [PATCH 4/4] msm: iommu: Remove dependency on IDR Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-02-25 2:00 ` Stepan Moskovchenko
2011-03-08 23:43 ` [PATCH 1/4] msm: iommu: Clock control for the IOMMU driver David Brown
2011-03-08 23:43 ` David Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4D6828B5.6050608@codeaurora.org \
--to=stepanm@codeaurora.org \
--cc=davidb@codeaurora.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tsoni@codeaurora.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.