The csiphyX_timer and csiX_phy values need not be hard-coded. We can
functionally decompose the string matching inside of a loop.
Static string values are brittle, difficult to extend and not required
anyway since the camss->res->csiphy_num value informs us of the number
of CSIPHYs and hence the set of potential clocks for a given CSIPHY.
In simple terms if we have five CSIPHYs we can have no more and no less
than five csiphy_timer clocks. Similarly csi_phy core clocks have a 1:1
relationship with the PHY they clock.
Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
---
.../media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c | 37 ++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
index 0e8c2a59ea241..baf78c525fbfc 100644
--- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
+++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
@@ -536,6 +536,15 @@ static int csiphy_init_formats(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
return csiphy_set_format(sd, fh ? fh->state : NULL, &format);
}
+static bool csiphy_match_clock_name(const char *clock_name, const char *format,
+ int index)
+{
+ char name[CAMSS_RES_MAX];
+
+ snprintf(name, sizeof(name), format, index);
+ return !strcmp(clock_name, name);
+}
+
/*
* msm_csiphy_subdev_init - Initialize CSIPHY device structure and resources
* @csiphy: CSIPHY device
@@ -550,7 +559,7 @@ int msm_csiphy_subdev_init(struct camss *camss,
{
struct device *dev = camss->dev;
struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
- int i, j;
+ int i, j, k;
int ret;
csiphy->camss = camss;
@@ -666,19 +675,19 @@ int msm_csiphy_subdev_init(struct camss *camss,
for (j = 0; j < clock->nfreqs; j++)
clock->freq[j] = res->clock_rate[i][j];
- if (!strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy0_timer") ||
- !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy1_timer") ||
- !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy2_timer") ||
- !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy3_timer") ||
- !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy4_timer") ||
- !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy5_timer"))
- csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
-
- if (camss->res->version == CAMSS_660 &&
- (!strcmp(clock->name, "csi0_phy") ||
- !strcmp(clock->name, "csi1_phy") ||
- !strcmp(clock->name, "csi2_phy")))
- csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
+ for (k = 0; k < camss->res->csiphy_num; k++) {
+ csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
+ "csiphy%d_timer", k);
+ if (csiphy->rate_set[i])
+ break;
+
+ if (camss->res->version == CAMSS_660) {
+ csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
+ "csi%d_phy", k);
+ if (csiphy->rate_set[i])
+ break;
+ }
+ }
}
return 0;
--
2.41.0Hi Bryan,
Thank you for the patch.
On Wed, Aug 23, 2023 at 11:44:40AM +0100, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> The csiphyX_timer and csiX_phy values need not be hard-coded. We can
> functionally decompose the string matching inside of a loop.
>
> Static string values are brittle, difficult to extend and not required
> anyway since the camss->res->csiphy_num value informs us of the number
> of CSIPHYs and hence the set of potential clocks for a given CSIPHY.
>
> In simple terms if we have five CSIPHYs we can have no more and no less
> than five csiphy_timer clocks. Similarly csi_phy core clocks have a 1:1
> relationship with the PHY they clock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
> ---
> .../media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c | 37 ++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
> index 0e8c2a59ea241..baf78c525fbfc 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
> @@ -536,6 +536,15 @@ static int csiphy_init_formats(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> return csiphy_set_format(sd, fh ? fh->state : NULL, &format);
> }
>
> +static bool csiphy_match_clock_name(const char *clock_name, const char *format,
> + int index)
> +{
> + char name[CAMSS_RES_MAX];
> +
> + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), format, index);
> + return !strcmp(clock_name, name);
This is very error-prone. You hide the buffer size from the caller,
which will make it prone to buffer overflows.
> +}
> +
> /*
> * msm_csiphy_subdev_init - Initialize CSIPHY device structure and resources
> * @csiphy: CSIPHY device
> @@ -550,7 +559,7 @@ int msm_csiphy_subdev_init(struct camss *camss,
> {
> struct device *dev = camss->dev;
> struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
> - int i, j;
> + int i, j, k;
> int ret;
>
> csiphy->camss = camss;
> @@ -666,19 +675,19 @@ int msm_csiphy_subdev_init(struct camss *camss,
> for (j = 0; j < clock->nfreqs; j++)
> clock->freq[j] = res->clock_rate[i][j];
>
> - if (!strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy0_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy1_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy2_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy3_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy4_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy5_timer"))
> - csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
> -
> - if (camss->res->version == CAMSS_660 &&
> - (!strcmp(clock->name, "csi0_phy") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csi1_phy") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csi2_phy")))
> - csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
> + for (k = 0; k < camss->res->csiphy_num; k++) {
> + csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
> + "csiphy%d_timer", k);
> + if (csiphy->rate_set[i])
> + break;
> +
> + if (camss->res->version == CAMSS_660) {
> + csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
> + "csi%d_phy", k);
> + if (csiphy->rate_set[i])
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> }
>
> return 0;
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
On 23.08.2023 12:44, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> The csiphyX_timer and csiX_phy values need not be hard-coded. We can
> functionally decompose the string matching inside of a loop.
>
> Static string values are brittle, difficult to extend and not required
> anyway since the camss->res->csiphy_num value informs us of the number
> of CSIPHYs and hence the set of potential clocks for a given CSIPHY.
>
> In simple terms if we have five CSIPHYs we can have no more and no less
> than five csiphy_timer clocks. Similarly csi_phy core clocks have a 1:1
> relationship with the PHY they clock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
> ---
> .../media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c | 37 ++++++++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
> index 0e8c2a59ea241..baf78c525fbfc 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-csiphy.c
> @@ -536,6 +536,15 @@ static int csiphy_init_formats(struct v4l2_subdev *sd,
> return csiphy_set_format(sd, fh ? fh->state : NULL, &format);
> }
>
> +static bool csiphy_match_clock_name(const char *clock_name, const char *format,
> + int index)
> +{
> + char name[CAMSS_RES_MAX];
similar comment to the previous patch about the buf size
> +
> + snprintf(name, sizeof(name), format, index);
> + return !strcmp(clock_name, name);
> +}
> +
> /*
> * msm_csiphy_subdev_init - Initialize CSIPHY device structure and resources
> * @csiphy: CSIPHY device
> @@ -550,7 +559,7 @@ int msm_csiphy_subdev_init(struct camss *camss,
> {
> struct device *dev = camss->dev;
> struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
> - int i, j;
> + int i, j, k;
> int ret;
>
> csiphy->camss = camss;
> @@ -666,19 +675,19 @@ int msm_csiphy_subdev_init(struct camss *camss,
> for (j = 0; j < clock->nfreqs; j++)
> clock->freq[j] = res->clock_rate[i][j];
>
> - if (!strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy0_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy1_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy2_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy3_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy4_timer") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csiphy5_timer"))
> - csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
> -
> - if (camss->res->version == CAMSS_660 &&
> - (!strcmp(clock->name, "csi0_phy") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csi1_phy") ||
> - !strcmp(clock->name, "csi2_phy")))
> - csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
> + for (k = 0; k < camss->res->csiphy_num; k++) {
> + csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
> + "csiphy%d_timer", k);
This entire functions is like.. soooo over-engineered
adding something like csiphy_timer_clks and cisphy_clks and stuff
would make this string comparison mess unnecessary
> + if (csiphy->rate_set[i])
> + break;
> +
> + if (camss->res->version == CAMSS_660) {
> + csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
> + "csi%d_phy", k);
hm, only ratesetting on 660 sounds very sus
Konrad
On 26/08/2023 11:12, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> - csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
>> + for (k = 0; k < camss->res->csiphy_num; k++) {
>> + csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
>> + "csiphy%d_timer", k);
> This entire functions is like.. soooo over-engineered
I'm going to accept your compliment there.
> adding something like csiphy_timer_clks and cisphy_clks and stuff
> would make this string comparison mess unnecessary
I don't understand your comment.
Having a litany of static comparisons is definitely inferior to a
generic helper function.
I'm not sure what you are asking/arguing for here.
---
bod
On 26.08.2023 14:07, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 26/08/2023 11:12, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> - csiphy->rate_set[i] = true;
>>> + for (k = 0; k < camss->res->csiphy_num; k++) {
>>> + csiphy->rate_set[i] = csiphy_match_clock_name(clock->name,
>>> + "csiphy%d_timer", k);
>> This entire functions is like.. soooo over-engineered
>
> I'm going to accept your compliment there.
>
>
>> adding something like csiphy_timer_clks and cisphy_clks and stuff
>> would make this string comparison mess unnecessary
>
> I don't understand your comment.
>
> Having a litany of static comparisons is definitely inferior to a generic helper function.
portray this
struct camss_whatever_it_was_called {
struct clk_bulk_data *csiphy_clks;
struct clk_bulk_data *csiphy_timer_clks;
[...]
}
and then
clk_bulk_prepare_enable(csiphy_clks)
etc
instead of weird looping and matching
Konrad
On 26/08/2023 13:11, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>> adding something like csiphy_timer_clks and cisphy_clks and stuff
>>> would make this string comparison mess unnecessary
>> I don't understand your comment.
>>
>> Having a litany of static comparisons is definitely inferior to a generic helper function.
> portray this
>
> struct camss_whatever_it_was_called {
> struct clk_bulk_data *csiphy_clks;
> struct clk_bulk_data *csiphy_timer_clks;
> [...]
> }
>
> and then
>
> clk_bulk_prepare_enable(csiphy_clks)
Ah would be grateful if you had just said "hey could you try using
clk_bulk_prepare_enable()"
But, OK.
Thanks !
---
bod
On 26.08.2023 14:14, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 26/08/2023 13:11, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>> adding something like csiphy_timer_clks and cisphy_clks and stuff
>>>> would make this string comparison mess unnecessary
>>> I don't understand your comment.
>>>
>>> Having a litany of static comparisons is definitely inferior to a generic helper function.
>> portray this
>>
>> struct camss_whatever_it_was_called {
>> struct clk_bulk_data *csiphy_clks;
>> struct clk_bulk_data *csiphy_timer_clks;
>> [...]
>> }
>>
>> and then
>>
>> clk_bulk_prepare_enable(csiphy_clks)
>
> Ah would be grateful if you had just said "hey could you try using clk_bulk_prepare_enable()"
Right I could have been more clear
Konrad
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.