Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
References: <20200519170440.294601-1-jbrunet@baylibre.com> <CAFBinCBXTwKz81bQK3U1bv7vGiryhShijqh2hqaypPvLopvwNA@mail.gmail.com>
User-agent: mu4e 1.3.3; emacs 26.3
From:   Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
To:     Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: add api to get clk consummer from clk_hw
In-reply-to: <CAFBinCBXTwKz81bQK3U1bv7vGiryhShijqh2hqaypPvLopvwNA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 May 2020 20:58:45 +0200
Message-ID: <1j8shbkhsq.fsf@starbuckisacylon.baylibre.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On Wed 27 May 2020 at 22:07, Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jerome,
>
> On Tue, May 19, 2020 at 7:09 PM Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com> wrote:
> [...]
>> + * Calls to this function must be balanced with calls clk_put()
>> + */
>> +struct clk *clk_hw_get_clk(struct clk_hw *hw)
> I haven't looked at it myself yet, but would it be hard to have a
> devm_ variant of this function as well?

Seems easy enough.
Stephen is this OK with you ?

I'm just wondering if this devm_ function should use the device pointer
embedded in the clk_hw structure or have it as an argument ?

The 1st option seems simpler but I'm not sure it is correct.

Thoughts ?

> a non-devm managed function would add boilerplate to the meson-mx-sdhc-mmc code
>
> also this may or may not simplify how to fetch the struct device
> pointer for this use-case.
> (that said, I only know about drivers for Amlogic related IP and there
> the devm_ variant can be used, but I don't know about other potential
> consumers of this new API)
>
>
> Thank you!
> Martin