From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matti Vaittinen Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] clk: bd71837: Add driver for BD71837 PMIC clock Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2018 11:09:14 +0300 Message-ID: <20180803080914.GA20907@localhost.localdomain> References: <152878945117.16708.12422348324182290971@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <20180612082354.GG20078@localhost.localdomain> <152997029783.143105.16692843405899913246@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com> <20180626081319.GA2118@localhost.localdomain> <20180731073023.GA2956@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180731073023.GA2956@localhost.localdomain> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd , robh+dt@kernel.org Cc: Matti Vaittinen , broonie@kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, lgirdwood@gmail.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mikko.mutanen@fi.rohmeurope.com, heikki.haikola@fi.rohmeurope.com List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 11:28:58AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 11:13:19AM +0300, Matti Vaittinen wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 04:44:57PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > Quoting Matti Vaittinen (2018-06-12 01:23:54) > > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 12:44:11AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > > > Quoting Matti Vaittinen (2018-06-04 06:19:13) [snip] > > > 3. Create devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider_w_node() which does something > After giving this second thought - I think there is limited amount of use cases where other than own or parent nodes should be used. Actually, the MFD node being parent is pretty much only use case I can think of where something else but own node should be used. Hence function like suggested devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider_w_node might invite thinking of clever hacks... So, perhaps introducing devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider_parent() (see idea below) would be option to consider? I feel the bd71837 driver is not only case where MFD is being parent which has the clock stuff in DT. static int __devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(struct device *dev, struct clk_hw *(*get)(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec, void *data), struct device_node *of_node, void *data) { struct device_node **ptr; int ret; ptr = devres_alloc(devm_of_clk_release_provider, sizeof(*ptr), GFP_KERNEL); if (!ptr) return -ENOMEM; *ptr = of_node; ret = of_clk_add_hw_provider(of_node, get, data); if (!ret) devres_add(dev, ptr); else devres_free(ptr); return ret; } int devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(struct device *dev, struct clk_hw *(*get)(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec, void *data), void *data) { return __devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(dev, get, dev->of_node, data); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider); int devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider_parent(struct device *dev, struct clk_hw *(*get)(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec, void *data), void *data) { return __devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(*dev, get, dev->parent->of_node, data); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider_parent); > just a friendly reminder, what's your opinion on adding this kind of > function (devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider_w_node)? or solutions 1/2? And are > these options safe what comes to reference counting of of_nodes? I thik the reference counting should not be a problem when use is limited to (MFD) parent device nodes, right? Best regards Matti Vaittinen