On 10/06/2014 10:14 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
This is the end goal. I understand that the provider API is sort
of a mess with us allowing drivers to use the underscore and
non-underscore functions and the mixture of struct clk and struct
ckl_hw throughout.
struct clk_hw <--> struct clk_core <----> struct clk
\-> struct clk
|-> struct clk
Agree this is how it should look like at some point, but for now I
need a reference to struct clk from struct clk_hw, so providers can
keep using the existing API. This reference would be removed once they
move to the new clk_hw-based API.
Ok sounds like we're on the same page.
+struct clk *__clk_create_clk(struct clk_core *clk_core, const char *dev_id,
+ const char *con_id);
+#endif
diff --git a/drivers/clk/clkdev.c b/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
index da4bda8..fe3712f 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clkdev.c
@@ -168,14 +172,27 @@ static struct clk_lookup *clk_find(const char *dev_id,
const char *con_id)
struct clk *clk_get_sys(const char *dev_id, const char *con_id)
{
struct clk_lookup *cl;
+ struct clk *clk = NULL;
mutex_lock(&clocks_mutex);
cl = clk_find(dev_id, con_id);
- if (cl && !__clk_get(cl->clk))
- cl = NULL;
+ if (cl) {
+#if defined(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK)
+ clk = __clk_create_clk(cl->clk->core, dev_id, con_id);
+ if (clk && !__clk_get(clk)) {
+ kfree(clk);
This looks weird. It makes me suspect we've failed to reference
count something properly. Can we avoid this?
Can you extend on this? But I see how the behaviour doesn't match the
previous one because cl should be NULLed when __clk_get fails. I have
fixed this.
It triggers my "that's not symmetric filter" because it requires the
caller to free something allocated by the callee. Do we still need
__clk_get() to be called in the common clock path? Why not just do the
stuff we do in __clk_get() in __clk_create_clk()? Then if that fails we
can return an error pointer indicating some sort of failure (-ENOENT?)
and we don't need to do any sort of cleanup otherwise.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html