Messages in this thread | | | From | Arnd Bergmann <> | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCHv3 3/6] clk: Add TI-Nspire clock drivers | Date | Wed, 15 May 2013 16:07:54 +0200 |
| |
On Sunday 12 May 2013, Daniel Tang wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Daniel Tang <dt.tangr@gmail.com> > --- > drivers/clk/Makefile | 1 + > drivers/clk/clk-nspire.c | 141 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 142 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 drivers/clk/clk-nspire.c
You are missing a binding in Documentation/devicetree, same as for some of the other drivers in this series.
> +static int nspire_clk_read(struct device_node *node, > + struct nspire_clk_info *clk) > +{ > + u32 val; > + int ret; > + void __iomem *io; > + const char *type = NULL; > + > + ret = of_property_read_string(node, "io-type", &type); > + if (ret) > + return ret;
Using a string here feels clumsy. Why not use the "compatible" property to distinguish the different models?
> +static void __init nspire_ahbdiv_setup(struct device_node *node) > +{ > + int ret; > + struct clk *clk; > + const char *clk_name = node->name; > + const char *parent_name; > + struct nspire_clk_info info; > + > + ret = nspire_clk_read(node, &info); > + if (WARN_ON(ret)) > + return; > + > + of_property_read_string(node, "clock-output-names", &clk_name);
It seems strange to assign the clk_name variable to node->name first and then overriding it with the clock-output-names property. Is that intentional? If so, please explain it in a comment.
> + > + pr_info("TI-NSPIRE Base: %uMHz CPU: %uMHz AHB: %uMHz\n", > + info.base_clock / MHZ, > + info.base_clock / info.base_cpu_ratio / MHZ, > + info.base_clock / info.base_ahb_ratio / MHZ); > +} > + > +CLK_OF_DECLARE(nspire_clk, "nspire-clock", nspire_clk_setup); > +CLK_OF_DECLARE(nspire_ahbdiv, "nspire-ahb-divider", nspire_ahbdiv_setup);
I would put each of these lines directly under the function it references.
Arnd
| |