From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from bali.collaboradmins.com (bali.collaboradmins.com [148.251.105.195]) (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 4002C2522BE; Wed, 1 Oct 2025 11:43:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759319013; cv=none; b=VP9/8eSRvJtAHRfUriwAiDH136nRqU6fdxT7vMU3fGh5Dbm3Ro4BJBqRc3zhVHREdXzMxX4PpIKoTwTwRLBZ4F+11I5b6zDjGNrQmUpgVhePM/Zi3wLkN+iCqX/l6sBPmo3LXqF4EGiWaH83qC14oi88595sQAWzct+0PovIQUI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1759319013; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QwWYceFhrlj2n4QpoSYYb1INdrt8SZFnjsPSRKC8Ai8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=sT/v8V7aTF3nTBOEtqOtDJx3BUZUJtVXLdEfJ2CfIRB6Qk0SS2MQ59g29LnUi/1dyEF/w4BZK3zeiB3dJXT6ks72XERt/EdUJl537yzhYQ9a8c07Zejhkp6ntDzs0/BBNl6d9UWFUQvSa6cNBBAEm8jGe9fRUFmPTmWXzTqD9/w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b=JvdRWBya; arc=none smtp.client-ip=148.251.105.195 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=collabora.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=collabora.com header.i=@collabora.com header.b="JvdRWBya" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=collabora.com; s=mail; t=1759319009; bh=QwWYceFhrlj2n4QpoSYYb1INdrt8SZFnjsPSRKC8Ai8=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=JvdRWByaedr36nrzV9z49Su5k+BFyLuJAdCvn5zRJ7dTh6fnVFJZ43gx7RznmEaDQ OpGNJgMdGzDpzyZzxZfAvSq7s38t/v/UeTzT6JnrQ1O5H7iX8usV7PVy7k4mxwTKrV O2kTui57hrk7bH8gMQnn4Qz0CraaoAfVD+Hg9L2OjXuX+XN+Q79rb2hBmabmRMitQj J3opN7MBT9NWwYzdz7iVKIhv3AtYDfooccdbeKEI42xfYKCljKG+eRDgSUWEtLjKab Ry1qMKKMw06NXMyJ6V7MhlIKNy6ElIEsGU0dfJhfXT6vMrtfuKE3+SJPNFEJF3ljJA 28KvNjvVv1L9g== Received: from [192.168.1.100] (2-237-20-237.ip236.fastwebnet.it [2.237.20.237]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kholk11) by bali.collaboradmins.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A46AA17E131B; Wed, 1 Oct 2025 13:43:28 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2025 13:43:27 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] clk: mediatek: Refactor pll registration to pass device To: Nicolas Frattaroli , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Rob Herring , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Matthias Brugger , Guangjie Song , Laura Nao , =?UTF-8?B?TsOtY29sYXMgRi4gUi4gQS4gUHJhZG8=?= , Yassine Oudjana Cc: kernel@collabora.com, Krzysztof Kozlowski , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org References: <20250929-mtk-pll-rpm-v1-0-49541777878d@collabora.com> <20250929-mtk-pll-rpm-v1-2-49541777878d@collabora.com> From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <20250929-mtk-pll-rpm-v1-2-49541777878d@collabora.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Il 29/09/25 14:13, Nicolas Frattaroli ha scritto: > As it stands, mtk_clk_register_plls takes a struct device_node pointer > as its first argument. This is a tragic happenstance, as it's trivial to > get the device_node from a struct device, but the opposite not so much. > The struct device is a much more useful thing to have passed down. > > Refactor mtk_clk_register_plls to take a struct device pointer instead > of a struct device_node pointer, and fix up all users of this function. > This will allow us to extend clk-pll with runtime PM things later. > > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Frattaroli Thanks for doing that - this exact thing has been in my backlog for a very long time now, and you've done it before I could, and without even knowing that this was in my plans. Perfect. Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno