On 11/30, Yixun Lan wrote:

Hi Stephen

On 11/30/17 03:34, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

On 11/28, Yixun Lan wrote:

quoted

diff --git a/drivers/clk/meson/axg.c b/drivers/clk/meson/axg.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..51c5b4062715
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/clk/meson/axg.c

@@ -0,0 +1,948 @@
+/*
+ * AmLogic Meson-AXG Clock Controller Driver
+ *
+ * Copyright (c) 2016 Baylibre SAS.
+ * Author: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>
+ *
+ * Copyright (c) 2017 Amlogic, inc.
+ * Author: Qiufang Dai <qiufang.dai@amlogic.com>
+ *
+ * SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+
+ */
+
+#include <linux/clk.h>
+#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
+#include <linux/of_address.h>
+#include <linux/of_device.h>
+#include <linux/platform_device.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
+
+#include "clkc.h"
+#include "axg.h"
+
+static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(clk_lock);

meson_axg_clk_lock?

em... I'd leave it unchanged

because the spinlock will be used at macro MESON_GATE() [1] which
defined at drivers/clk/meson/clkc.h, and it assume using the generic
name 'clk_lock', change name will break the code..

and besides it's already defined as static, so I see no problem here

The problem is lockdep debugging and ctags/grep on the source
code. clk_lock is very generic when it should be more specific so
we can find this lock later on from a lockdep report with a
simple search of the code.

Maybe make another patch to rename it to meson_clk_lock so the
macro doesn't have to change too much, and we get it slightly
more unique. Looks like v4l2 also has a clk_lock.

quoted

quoted

+};
+
+static int axg_clkc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+	const struct clkc_data *clkc_data;
+	void __iomem *clk_base;
+	int ret, clkid, i;
+	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
+
+	clkc_data = of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
+	if (!clkc_data)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	/*  Generic clocks and PLLs */
+	clk_base = of_iomap(dev->of_node, 0);

Use platform device APIs for ioremapping?

I assume you are referring to 'platform_get_resource +
devm_ioremap_resource' ?

the idea sounds good to me.

Yes.

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project