From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx.treblig.org (mx.treblig.org [46.235.229.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AAD4FC08 for ; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:58:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.235.229.95 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728521912; cv=none; b=sHA401Hhecp9gcKYl161+QESDFRsGPs4tEzNrXryg4WL2rGwlvBcrDSZ0WgJIwemXN7EQluRIi+ECWIzCPMlj7e2Om44S5vNy3ToMNHAW740JK/30RzlkbBrI1KPYQ/CKt0F1LTMv7rfkbMkWq2g70P9UiP3Ld1j6x0yICSA4L0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728521912; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Wn/pEVHe4v8IGyn2iG+dr3HXEQnPSRPvVcS7axQ/lRs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=S4FMM9ZNg0hH0P6gytclBmTECALmgjLVWynnJw6YhwpkgMEKtuxVrP6CQSd5Vu5MAVkz+5S4xBsf0vXhtEni9zBdvOma7DWlu3aYi/tgETehdxZHAQPZPZ8ZD4fwCrNXgr4iOi57cT45a2TTTY/mGjWBcwQUcGBZdzmwkHMbNcc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=treblig.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=treblig.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=treblig.org header.i=@treblig.org header.b=BAf7Damf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=46.235.229.95 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=treblig.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=treblig.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=treblig.org header.i=@treblig.org header.b="BAf7Damf" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=treblig.org ; s=bytemarkmx; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Subject:From:Date:From :Subject; bh=vhjWfio38+1QEIPlWi+RBsOK3++oFFSBnn6FKjYSTUE=; b=BAf7Damfox1+0e7o GCo/fCaIMj1hb/tF/l+8cVmTS259Yz77VAt8hP+UfgmtdTQsyLg8dmqrsAPUA6pjfIo9UNiVkZ981 hVmVlKcguLHYv54mG3GFjNfAqP6wjVzhH/CkjQtk3yjh20fNKHMf0eSfA6jRfcuivJ6LjY2tHD45n p3DtseZPqaf4qOt/Mn2GnJ/AJ/vZSSNOgRgCVAp+sg2xX/b2VXDFqt5jxJJqLC32QQB8h2Y5bDpbU bwd6DFYfGKG+35uY89uHyIQccriVAifDHspBW3AQGrz32uD1y6/TgO6PjIlG3vIX4oNq177Qumh/S Fz3QH7yG0wOKmK8eyw==; Received: from dg by mx.treblig.org with local (Exim 4.96) (envelope-from ) id 1syhVV-00A6wf-0p; Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:58:21 +0000 Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 00:58:21 +0000 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" To: Stephen Boyd Cc: mturquette@baylibre.com, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Of clk_hw_unregister_fractional_divider Message-ID: References: <27ac7ba804d260ca9e1397a17b9e8696.sboyd@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <27ac7ba804d260ca9e1397a17b9e8696.sboyd@kernel.org> X-Chocolate: 70 percent or better cocoa solids preferably X-Operating-System: Linux/6.1.0-21-amd64 (x86_64) X-Uptime: 00:52:01 up 154 days, 12:06, 1 user, load average: 0.08, 0.04, 0.01 User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) * Stephen Boyd (sboyd@kernel.org) wrote: > Quoting Dr. David Alan Gilbert (2024-10-08 17:54:24) > > Hi, > > One of my scripts noticed that clk_hw_unregister_fractional_divider > > was unused and I was thinking of dead coding it, but thought it worth > > asking whether it's actually a missing call to it. > > > > It was added in 2016 by: > > > > commit 39b44cff4ad4af6d7abd9dd2acb288b005c26503 > > Author: Stephen Boyd > > Date: Sun Feb 7 00:15:09 2016 -0800 > > > > clk: fractional-divider: Add hw based registration APIs > > > > and I can see clk_hw_register_fractional_divider is called from > > clk_register_fractional_divider. > > > > Is that just consequence of them being system devices that never > > get unregistered or something else? > > > > I don't know what you mean by system devices. I mean something that can't get unplugged/removed. > The clk_hw prefixed functions and clk_hw based APIs should be used > instead of struct clk APIs for clk providers in general. I'd accept a > patch that migrates the two calls to clk_register_fractional_divider() > with a call to clk_hw_register_fractional_divider() instead. If that's > done we can remove clk_register_fractional_divider(), which is the > overall plan but nobody got around to it so far. Oh hmm, that doesn't look too hard for those two - although I'm not sure I have a way of testing it? However, my question was about the clk_hw_*un*register_fractional_divider - I can see the clk_register_fractional_divider can be replaced by clk_hw_register_fractional_divider - but would there need to be a call to the unregister somewhere? (Which is what my script noticed there's no callers of). Dave -- -----Open up your eyes, open up your mind, open up your code ------- / Dr. David Alan Gilbert | Running GNU/Linux | Happy \ \ dave @ treblig.org | | In Hex / \ _________________________|_____ http://www.treblig.org |_______/