[PATCH 04/22] clk: sunxi: move "ahb_sdram" to protected clock list

[Chen-Yu Tsai]

On Mon, May 26, 2014 at 2:51 AM, Maxime Ripard
<maxime.ripard at free-electrons.com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 03:51:07PM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote:
>> With sunxi_gates clocks registered with clkdev, we can use the
>> protected clocks list to enable the "ahb_sdram" clock, instead
>> of looking for it and adding CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED inline in the
>> clock setup code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen-Yu Tsai <wens at csie.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sunxi.c | 10 ++++------
>>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sunxi.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sunxi.c
>> index 3e33bc1..b2c6d12 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sunxi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-sunxi.c
>> @@ -870,7 +870,6 @@ static void __init sunxi_gates_clk_setup(struct device_node *node,
>>       int qty;
>>       int i = 0;
>>       int j = 0;
>> -     int ignore;
>>
>>       reg = of_iomap(node, 0);
>>
>> @@ -891,15 +890,12 @@ static void __init sunxi_gates_clk_setup(struct device_node *node,
>>               of_property_read_string_index(node, "clock-output-names",
>>                                             j, &clk_name);
>>
>> -             /* No driver claims this clock, but it should remain gated */
>> -             ignore = !strcmp("ahb_sdram", clk_name) ? CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED : 0;
>> -
>>               clk_data->clks[i] = clk_register_gate(NULL, clk_name,
>> -                                                   clk_parent, ignore,
>> +                                                   clk_parent, 0,
>>                                                     reg + 4 * (i/32), i % 32,
>>                                                     0, &clk_lock);
>>               WARN_ON(IS_ERR(clk_data->clks[i]));
>> -             clk_register_clkdev(clks[i], clk_name, NULL);
>> +             clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[i], clk_name, NULL);
>
> I'm fine with the change itself, but shouldn't this part of it be in
> the patch that actually add this line?
>
> Looks broken to me otherwise.

Brain fart on my part. I squashed a fixup for patch 2 into this one.


Thanks
ChenYu