Re: [PATCH 2/4] msm: iommu: Rework clock logic and add IOMMU busclock control

[Stepan Moskovchenko]

On 2/24/2011 11:29 PM, Trilok Soni wrote:
> Hi Steve,

Hello

> > @@ -130,117 +131,134 @@ static int msm_iommu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >   {
> >   	struct resource *r, *r2;
> >   	struct clk *iommu_clk;
> > +	struct clk *iommu_pclk;
> >   	struct msm_iommu_drvdata *drvdata;
> >   	struct msm_iommu_dev *iommu_dev = pdev->dev.platform_data;
> const please.

I am not clear on what you mean. Please be more specific here.

> > +	iommu_pclk = clk_get(NULL, "smmu_pclk");
> > +	if (IS_ERR(iommu_pclk)) {
> > +		ret = -ENODEV;
> > +		goto fail;
> > +	}
> I am not a big fan of this when you have the "device" around. You should just do
>
> iommu_pclk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
>
> ...error logic...
>
> iommu_clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "iommu_clk");
>
> ...error logic...

The pclk is a "special" bus clock and does not have a specific device 
instance associated with it, so passing a device would not be 
appropriate in this case. I pass the device for other clocks that are 
indeed associated with devices, but this is not one of them. I suppose 
we could create 11 or 12 aliases for the pclk and associate it with all 
the IOMMU devices, but I would prefer to avoid doing that as I believe 
the current approach is cleaner.

> > -			ret = -EBUSY;
> > -			goto fail;
> > -		}
> > +	len = r->end - r->start + 1;
>
> resource_size please.

Ok


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/