[PATCH v3] clk: implement clk_unregister
Sylwester Nawrocki
s.nawrocki at samsung.com
Wed Jul 17 07:28:30 EDT 2013
Hello,
On 06/03/2013 10:37 AM, Jiada Wang wrote:
> Currently clk_unregister is unimplemented, it is required in case
> sub modules want actually remove clk device registered by clk_register.
> This patch adds the implementation of clk_unregister.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiada Wang <jiada_wang at mentor.com>
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk.c | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 57 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> index 934cfd1..0b9e13c 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> @@ -342,6 +342,25 @@ out:
> return ret;
> }
>
> + /**
> + * clk_debug_unregister - remove a clk node from the debugfs clk tree
> + * @clk: the clk being removed from the debugfs clk tree
> + *
> + * Dynamically removes a clk and all it's children clk nodes from the
> + * debugfs clk tree if clk->dentry points to debugfs created by
> + * clk_debug_register in __clk_init.
> + *
> + * Caller must hold prepare_lock.
> + *
> + */
> +static void clk_debug_unregister(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> + if (!clk || !clk->dentry)
> + return;
> +
> + debugfs_remove_recursive(clk->dentry);
> +}
> +
> /**
> * clk_debug_reparent - reparent clk node in the debugfs clk tree
> * @clk: the clk being reparented
> @@ -432,6 +451,9 @@ static inline int clk_debug_register(struct clk *clk) { return 0; }
> static inline void clk_debug_reparent(struct clk *clk, struct clk *new_parent)
> {
> }
> +static inline void clk_debug_unregister(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> +}
> #endif
>
> /* caller must hold prepare_lock */
> @@ -1790,9 +1812,42 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_register);
> * clk_unregister - unregister a currently registered clock
> * @clk: clock to unregister
> *
> - * Currently unimplemented.
> */
> -void clk_unregister(struct clk *clk) {}
> +void clk_unregister(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + if (!clk)
> + return;
> +
> + mutex_lock(&prepare_lock);
> + if (clk->prepare_count) {
> + pr_debug("%s: can't unregister clk %s, it is prepared\n",
> + __func__, clk->name);
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + if (!hlist_empty(&clk->children)) {
> + pr_debug("%s: clk %s has registered children\n",
> + __func__, clk->name);
> + goto out;
How about moving the clock to the orphan list instead, as Mike
suggested [1] ?
> + }
> +
> + clk_debug_unregister(clk);
> +
> + hlist_del_init(&clk->child_node);
> +
> + kfree(clk->parents);
> + i = clk->num_parents;
> + while (--i >= 0)
> + kfree(clk->parent_names[i]);
> + kfree(clk->parent_names);
> + kfree(clk->name);
> + kfree(clk);
> +out:
> + mutex_unlock(&prepare_lock);
> + return;
Redundant return statement.
> +}
Shouldn't we also free the clock supplier specific data structure
for the clock, i.e. the structure struct clk_hw is embedded in ?
One possible way to solve this could be to provide, e.g. destroy()
operation in struct clk_ops ? Alternatively clock providers would
need to store a list of their clock specific data structures
associated with each struct clk they have registered.
[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg250613.html
Thanks,
Sylwester
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list