From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Martin Sperl <kernel@martin.sperl.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/4] clk: bcm2835: avoid the use of BCM2835_CLOCK_COUNT
 in clk-bcm2835
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2016 13:11:02 +0100
Message-ID: <56979056.6010407@martin.sperl.org>
References: <1452542157-2387-1-git-send-email-kernel@martin.sperl.org>
 <1452542157-2387-2-git-send-email-kernel@martin.sperl.org>
 <20160113200012.1168.74515@quark.deferred.io>
 <20160114001358.1168.5768@quark.deferred.io>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20160114001358.1168.5768@quark.deferred.io>
Sender: linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>, Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net>, Remi Pommarel <repk@triplefau.lt>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-rpi-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org



On 14.01.2016 01:13, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Michael Turquette (2016-01-13 12:00:12)
>> Hi Martin,
>>
>> Quoting kernel@martin.sperl.org (2016-01-11 11:55:53)
>>>   static int bcm2835_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>   {
>>>          struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>>>          struct clk **clks;
>>> +       size_t clk_cnt;
>>>          struct bcm2835_cprman *cprman;
>>>          struct resource *res;
>>> +       size_t i;
>>> +
>>> +       /* find the max clock index */
>>> +       clk_cnt = BCM2835_CLOCK_PERI_IMAGE; /* see below */
>>> +       for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(bcm2835_register_clocks); i++)
>>> +               clk_cnt = max(clk_cnt, bcm2835_register_clocks[i].index);
>>> +       clk_cnt += 1;
>>
>> I'm not sure how this solution is better than using CLOCK_COUNT. Some
>> other bindings use a max value, NR_CLKS or other sentinel.
>>
>> Why did you not choose to set clk_cnt equal to BCM2835_CLOCK_PWM? Why
>> not initialize it to zero?
>
> OK, I just caught up on the asoc/bcm2835 thread.
>
> Really the best solution would be to have an array of all of the clks in
> the driver and just use ARRAY_SIZE on it.
>
> For your driver, could you make an array of clk_hw pointers and call
> devm_clk_register on all of them in a loop? This gets rid of the big
> pile of explicit calls in bcm2835_clk_probe.
>
> You can also get rid of stuff like bcm2835_plla_core_data by just
> stuffing that data into a single struct initialization. Here is a
> snippet for how the qcom clk drivers do it:
>
> static struct clk_pll gpll0 = {
> 	.l_reg = 0x0004,
> 	.m_reg = 0x0008,
> 	.n_reg = 0x000c,
> 	.config_reg = 0x0014,
> 	.mode_reg = 0x0000,
> 	.status_reg = 0x001c,
> 	.status_bit = 17,
> 	.clkr.hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> 		.name = "gpll0",
> 		.parent_names = (const char *[]){ "xo" },
> 		.num_parents = 1,
> 		.ops = &clk_pll_ops,
> 	},
> };

I did not know you could do that - that could make life easier...

But a quick look shows that this approach probably would require a
major rewrite of all the methods.

> static int bcm2835_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> 	...
> 	for (i = 0; i < num_clks; i++) {
> 		clk = devm_clk_register(dev, array_of_clks[i].hw)
> 	...
> }

I guess I can use a slightly different approach that does not
require as many changes, that looks like this:

static const struct bcm2835_clk_desc clk_desc_array[] = {
	/* register PLL */
	[BCM2835_PLLA]          = REGISTER_PLL(&bcm2835_plla_data),
	...
};
...
static int bcm2835_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
	const size_t asize = ARRAY_SIZE(clk_desc_array);
	...
	for (i = 0; i < asize; i++) {
		desc = &clk_desc_array[i];
		if (desc)
			clks[i] = desc->clk_register(cprman,
						     desc->data);
	}
	...
}

If we need to order the initialization then we can add some
priority field to clk_desc_array and iterate over all the priority
values.