Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 20 Jun 2017 14:08:20 -0700 | From | Stephen Boyd <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PM / OPP: Add dev_pm_opp_{set|put}_clkname() |
| |
On 06/20, Viresh Kumar wrote: > + */ > +struct opp_table *dev_pm_opp_set_clkname(struct device *dev, const char *name) > +{ > + struct opp_table *opp_table; > + int ret; > + > + opp_table = dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table(dev); > + if (!opp_table) > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM); > + > + /* This should be called before OPPs are initialized */ > + if (WARN_ON(!list_empty(&opp_table->opp_list))) { > + ret = -EBUSY; > + goto err; > + } > + > + /* Already have clkname set */ > + if (opp_table->clk_name) { > + ret = -EBUSY; > + goto err; > + } > + > + opp_table->clk_name = kstrdup(name, GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!opp_table->clk_name) {
Is there a reason to duplicate clk_name instead of using the clk structure returned from clk_get()? Is it because we may already have opp_table->clk set from default init? Why can't we always clk_put() the clk structure if it's !IS_ERR() and then allow dev_pm_opp_set_clkname() to be called many times in succession? Long story short, I don't see the benefit to allocating the name again here just to use it as a mechanism to know if the APIs have been called symmetrically.
> + ret = -ENOMEM; > + goto err; > + } > + > + /* Already have default clk set, free it */ > + if (!IS_ERR(opp_table->clk)) > + clk_put(opp_table->clk); > +
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
| |