[PATCH v3 3/5] clk: samsung: add Exynos ACPM clock driver

[Tudor Ambarus]

On 9/6/25 1:19 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 03/09/2025 15:56, Tudor Ambarus wrote:
>> +
>> +static int acpm_clk_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +	enum acpm_clk_dev_type type = platform_get_device_id(pdev)->driver_data;
>> +	const struct acpm_clk_driver_data *drv_data;
>> +	const struct acpm_handle *acpm_handle;
>> +	struct clk_hw_onecell_data *clk_data;
>> +	struct clk_hw **hws;
>> +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
>> +	struct acpm_clk *aclks;
>> +	unsigned int mbox_chan_id;
>> +	int i, err, count;
>> +
>> +	switch (type) {
>> +	case GS101_ACPM_CLK_ID:
>> +		drv_data = &acpm_clk_gs101;
> 
> Just use acpm_clk_gs101 directly (see also further comment).

okay

> 
>> +		break;
>> +	default:
>> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL, "Invalid device type\n");
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	acpm_handle = devm_acpm_get_by_node(dev, dev->parent->of_node);
>> +	if (IS_ERR(acpm_handle))
>> +		return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(acpm_handle),
>> +				     "Failed to get acpm handle.\n");
>> +
>> +	count = drv_data->nr_clks;
>> +	mbox_chan_id = drv_data->mbox_chan_id;
>> +
>> +	clk_data = devm_kzalloc(dev, struct_size(clk_data, hws, count),
>> +				GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!clk_data)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	clk_data->num = count;
>> +	hws = clk_data->hws;
>> +
>> +	aclks = devm_kcalloc(dev, count, sizeof(*aclks), GFP_KERNEL);
>> +	if (!aclks)
>> +		return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> +	for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
>> +		const struct acpm_clk_variant *variant = &drv_data->clks[i];
>> +		unsigned int id = variant->id;
>> +		struct acpm_clk *aclk;
>> +
>> +		if (id >= count)
> 
> This is not possible. You control the IDs build time, so this must be
> either build time check or no check. I vote for no check, because I

using BUILD_BUG_ON_MSG? that would work, see below the why.

> don't think the ID is anyhow related to number of clocks. What if (not
> recommended but what if) the IDs have a gap and next ID is 1000. I see
> your code using ID:
> 
> 
>> +			return dev_err_probe(dev, -EINVAL,
>> +					     "Invalid ACPM clock ID.\n");
>> +
>> +		aclk = &aclks[id];
>> +		aclk->id = id;
>> +		aclk->handle = acpm_handle;
>> +		aclk->mbox_chan_id = mbox_chan_id;
>> +
>> +		hws[id] = &aclk->hw;
> 
> ^^^ here, but why do you need it? Why it cannot be hws[i]?

so that it works correctly with of_clk_hw_onecell_get() in case the clocks
IDs are not starting from 0 or are reordered when defined. For example let's
consider clock ID 1 is wrongly defined at index 0 in the array. When someone
references clock ID 1 in the device tree, and we use of_clk_hw_onecell_get,
it would get the clock defined at index 1.

In my case the clocks start from index 0 and they are defined in ascending
order with no gaps, so the check is gratuitously made. I wanted to have some
sanity check. Do you still think I shall remove the check and use hws[i]?
> 
>> +
>> +		err = acpm_clk_ops_init(dev, aclk, variant->name);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			return dev_err_probe(dev, err,
>> +					     "Failed to register clock.\n");
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	return devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider(dev, of_clk_hw_onecell_get,
>> +					   clk_data);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static const struct platform_device_id acpm_clk_id[] = {
>> +	{ "gs101-acpm-clk", GS101_ACPM_CLK_ID },
> 
> Please drop GS101_ACPM_CLK_ID here and in other places. It's dead code
> now. It should be introduced with next users/devices.

okay. Thanks for the review!

> 
>> +	{},
>> +};
>> +MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(platform, acpm_clk_id);
> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof