On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 03:20:32PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:

On 12/20, Dong Aisheng wrote:

quoted

On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 03:48:21PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:

quoted

On 09/26, Dong Aisheng wrote:

quoted

here to handle this for DT users without 'clock-names' specified.

quoted

quoted

+#endif
 
 void clk_bulk_put(int num_clks, struct clk_bulk_data *clks)
 {

diff --git a/include/linux/clk.h b/include/linux/clk.h
index 12c96d9..073cb3b 100644
--- a/include/linux/clk.h
+++ b/include/linux/clk.h

@@ -680,10 +680,18 @@ static inline void clk_bulk_disable_unprepare(int num_clks,
 }
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_OF) && defined(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK)
+int __must_check of_clk_bulk_get(struct device_node *np, int num_clks,
+				 struct clk_bulk_data *clks);
 struct clk *of_clk_get(struct device_node *np, int index);
 struct clk *of_clk_get_by_name(struct device_node *np, const char *name);
 struct clk *of_clk_get_from_provider(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec);
 #else
+static inline int of_clk_bulk_get(struct device_node *np, int num_clks,

Do we need __must_check here too?

Yes, you're absolutely right.

of_clk_bulk_get is special as it returns error, so should add __must_check.

quoted

We should do the same for the
other bulk get APIs. Seems we missed that part last time.

Currently for !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK case, all APIs return 0.
!CONFIG_HAVE_CLK
clk_bulk_get		return 0
devm_clk_bulk_get	return 0
clk_bulk_enable		return 0
clk_bulk_prepare	return 0

Do you think we still need add __must_check for them?

Yes, we need it even when !CONFIG_HAVE_CLK because it allows us
to catch missing checking return values in the non-clk compile
configurations too. More test coverage.

Ok, understand.
May cook a patch to fix them.

quoted

And for CONFIG_HAVE_CLK case, all __must_check already added.

int __must_check clk_bulk_get
int __must_check devm_clk_bulk_get
int __must_check clk_bulk_enable
int __must_check clk_bulk_prepare

And no need for void function.
void clk_bulk_put
void clk_bulk_unprepare
void clk_bulk_disable

quoted

I'll fix all these things up when applying.

I did not see this in latest tree.
Suppose i should resend it with above things fixed, right?

I dropped it because it seems like maybe we don't need
of_clk_bulk_get(), but more like clk_get_all() or something like
that to acquire all clks for a device. It seems like it isn't DT
specific, and so we should just provide the "all" API instead of
some DT specific one that needs to know how many clks to get. I
think I sent a similar reply on some other thread and added you
to it.

I probably missed it before.
Will check later.

Thanks for reminder.

Regards
Dong Aisheng