On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 06:12:48PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 12/6/22 17:46, Serge Semin wrote:
On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 10:24:22PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote:
On 12/5/22 19:08, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Mon, Dec 5, 2022, at 02:11, Serge Semin wrote:
On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 12:48:32PM +0100, Anders Roxell wrote:
for (i = 0; i < hpriv->n_clks; i++) {
- if (!strcmp(hpriv->clks[i].id, con_id))
- if (hpriv->clks && hpriv->clks[i].id &&
- !strcmp(hpriv->clks[i].id, con_id)) return hpriv->clks[i].clk; }
Indeed I should have taken into account that devm_clk_bulk_get_all() can get unnamed clocks too. But checking the hpriv->clks pointer for being not null is redundant, since the ahci_platform_get_resources() procedure makes sure that the array is always allocated. At the very least you shouldn't check the pointer in the loop, but can make sure that the clks array is available before it.
Do you think this is otherwise the correct fix then? Any chance we can still get a version of it into 6.1?
I'll think of a better solution. But at this stage it seems like the best choice seeing the bindings permit having unnamed clocks specified.
If someone sends me a proper patch to apply, I can send a last PR for 6.1 to Linus before week end.
I'll submit the patch today. Thanks.
Anders just posted one. Can you review it please ?
Done. Thanks.
-Serge(y)
-Serge(y)
Arnd-- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research
-- Damien Le Moal Western Digital Research