[5/9] drm/msm/dsi_phy_28nm_8960: Replace parent names with clk_hw pointers

parent_hw pointers are easier to manage and cheaper to use than
repeatedly formatting the parent name and subsequently leaving the clk
framework to perform lookups based on that name.

Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>
---
 .../gpu/drm/msm/dsi/phy/dsi_phy_28nm_8960.c    | 18 +++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

--
2.36.1

On Tue, 24 May 2022 at 00:38, Marijn Suijten
<marijn.suijten@somainline.org> wrote:
>
> parent_hw pointers are easier to manage and cheaper to use than
> repeatedly formatting the parent name and subsequently leaving the clk
> framework to perform lookups based on that name.

Can you please add a followup patch (or a preface one) removing the
rest of devm_kzalloc()'ed clock names.

Reviewed-by: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>

Minor nit below.

>
> Signed-off-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@somainline.org>
> ---
>  .../gpu/drm/msm/dsi/phy/dsi_phy_28nm_8960.c    | 18 +++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/phy/dsi_phy_28nm_8960.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/phy/dsi_phy_28nm_8960.c
> index fc56cdcc9ad6..943a7e847c90 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/phy/dsi_phy_28nm_8960.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/dsi/phy/dsi_phy_28nm_8960.c
> @@ -383,7 +383,7 @@ static int dsi_28nm_pll_restore_state(struct msm_dsi_phy *phy)
>
>  static int pll_28nm_register(struct dsi_pll_28nm *pll_28nm, struct clk_hw **provided_clocks)
>  {
> -       char *clk_name, *parent_name, *vco_name;
> +       char *clk_name, *vco_name;
>         struct clk_init_data vco_init = {
>                 .parent_data = &(const struct clk_parent_data) {
>                         .fw_name = "ref",
> @@ -408,10 +408,6 @@ static int pll_28nm_register(struct dsi_pll_28nm *pll_28nm, struct clk_hw **prov
>         if (!vco_name)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
>
> -       parent_name = devm_kzalloc(dev, 32, GFP_KERNEL);
> -       if (!parent_name)
> -               return -ENOMEM;
> -
>         clk_name = devm_kzalloc(dev, 32, GFP_KERNEL);
>         if (!clk_name)
>                 return -ENOMEM;
> @@ -429,13 +425,14 @@ static int pll_28nm_register(struct dsi_pll_28nm *pll_28nm, struct clk_hw **prov
>         bytediv->hw.init = &bytediv_init;
>         bytediv->reg = pll_28nm->phy->pll_base + REG_DSI_28nm_8960_PHY_PLL_CTRL_9;
>
> -       snprintf(parent_name, 32, "dsi%dvco_clk", pll_28nm->phy->id);
>         snprintf(clk_name, 32, "dsi%dpllbyte", pll_28nm->phy->id + 1);
>
>         bytediv_init.name = clk_name;
>         bytediv_init.ops = &clk_bytediv_ops;
>         bytediv_init.flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT;
> -       bytediv_init.parent_names = (const char * const *) &parent_name;
> +       bytediv_init.parent_hws = (const struct clk_hw*[]){
> +               &pll_28nm->clk_hw,
> +       };
>         bytediv_init.num_parents = 1;

I wonder if we can express the bytediv clock with the standard ops.
However it's definitely a separate topic.

>
>         /* DIV2 */
> @@ -446,10 +443,9 @@ static int pll_28nm_register(struct dsi_pll_28nm *pll_28nm, struct clk_hw **prov
>
>         snprintf(clk_name, 32, "dsi%dpll", pll_28nm->phy->id + 1);
>         /* DIV3 */
> -       hw = devm_clk_hw_register_divider(dev, clk_name,
> -                               parent_name, 0, pll_28nm->phy->pll_base +
> -                               REG_DSI_28nm_8960_PHY_PLL_CTRL_10,
> -                               0, 8, 0, NULL);
> +       hw = devm_clk_hw_register_divider_parent_hw(dev, clk_name,
> +                       &pll_28nm->clk_hw, 0, pll_28nm->phy->pll_base +
> +                       REG_DSI_28nm_8960_PHY_PLL_CTRL_10, 0, 8, 0, NULL);

Again, could you please keep the linebreak in place?


>         if (IS_ERR(hw))
>                 return PTR_ERR(hw);
>         provided_clocks[DSI_PIXEL_PLL_CLK] = hw;
> --
> 2.36.1
>

On 2022-05-24 01:44:49, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Tue, 24 May 2022 at 01:44, Dmitry Baryshkov
> <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 24 May 2022 at 00:38, Marijn Suijten
> > <marijn.suijten@somainline.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > parent_hw pointers are easier to manage and cheaper to use than
> > > repeatedly formatting the parent name and subsequently leaving the clk
> > > framework to perform lookups based on that name.
> >
> > Can you please add a followup patch (or a preface one) removing the
> > rest of devm_kzalloc()'ed clock names.
> 
> Argh, stupid me, you did that in the next patch. Please ignore this.

It's a fair observation, one that bothered me as well.  I've reordered
the next patch before this one for the next revision, to have clearer
separation (since this patch was currently deleting 1/3 of the
devm_kzalloc()'s).

- Marijn