From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754426AbcH3SnQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:43:16 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:53448 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753095AbcH3SnL (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Aug 2016 14:43:11 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.1 smtp.codeaurora.org E626C61AED Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sboyd@codeaurora.org Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 11:43:09 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd To: Marcin Wojtas Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, Michael Turquette , Sebastian Hesselbarth , Andrew Lunn , Jason Cooper , Thomas Petazzoni , Gregory =?iso-8859-1?Q?Cl=E9ment?= , nadavh@marvell.com, Lior Amsalem , Tomasz Nowicki , Grzegorz Jaszczyk Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk: mvebu: dynamically allocate resources in Armada CP110 system controller Message-ID: <20160830184309.GB12510@codeaurora.org> References: <1471933609-8456-1-git-send-email-mw@semihalf.com> <1471933609-8456-3-git-send-email-mw@semihalf.com> <20160825001613.GQ19826@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/30, Marcin Wojtas wrote: > 2016-08-25 2:16 GMT+02:00 Stephen Boyd : > > On 08/23, Marcin Wojtas wrote: > >> @@ -335,10 +343,12 @@ static int cp110_syscon_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> cp110_clks[CP110_MAX_CORE_CLOCKS + i] = clk; > >> } > >> > >> - ret = of_clk_add_provider(np, cp110_of_clk_get, &cp110_clk_data); > >> + ret = of_clk_add_provider(np, cp110_of_clk_get, cp110_clk_data); > > > > It would be nice if this could be converted to > > of_clk_add_hw_provider(). > > Will try it. Shouldn't such change be placed in separate commit? Yes, of course. > > > > >> if (ret) > >> goto fail_clk_add; > >> > >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, cp110_clks); > >> + > >> return 0; > >> > >> fail_clk_add: > >> @@ -365,6 +375,7 @@ fail0: > >> > >> static int cp110_syscon_clk_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> { > >> + struct clk **cp110_clks = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > > > > Is this variable unused now? > > No, why? Just below there is a loop using it. Before it was taken from > global variable, which I got rid of. > Ok. I was just looking at the patch context. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project