[PATCH] ACPI / amba: Drop unnecessary check for registered amba_dummy_clk

Youwan Wang posted 1 patch 1 year, 6 months ago
There is a newer version of this series
drivers/acpi/arm64/amba.c | 6 +-----
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)
[PATCH] ACPI / amba: Drop unnecessary check for registered amba_dummy_clk
Posted by Youwan Wang 1 year, 6 months ago
amba_register_dummy_clk() is called only once from acpi_amba_init()
and acpi_amba_init() itself is called once during the initialisation.
amba_dummy_clk can't be initialised before this in any other code
path and hence the check for already registered amba_dummy_clk is
not necessary. Drop the same.

Signed-off-by: Youwan Wang <youwan@nfschina.com>
---
 drivers/acpi/arm64/amba.c | 6 +-----
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/acpi/arm64/amba.c b/drivers/acpi/arm64/amba.c
index 60be8ee1dbdc..ef438417cc80 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/arm64/amba.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/arm64/amba.c
@@ -35,11 +35,7 @@ static const struct acpi_device_id amba_id_list[] = {
 
 static void amba_register_dummy_clk(void)
 {
-	static struct clk *amba_dummy_clk;
-
-	/* If clock already registered */
-	if (amba_dummy_clk)
-		return;
+	struct clk *amba_dummy_clk;
 
 	amba_dummy_clk = clk_register_fixed_rate(NULL, "apb_pclk", NULL, 0, 0);
 	clk_register_clkdev(amba_dummy_clk, "apb_pclk", NULL);
-- 
2.25.1
Re: [PATCH] ACPI / amba: Drop unnecessary check for registered amba_dummy_clk
Posted by Sudeep Holla 1 year, 5 months ago
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 08:59:30AM +0800, Youwan Wang wrote:
> amba_register_dummy_clk() is called only once from acpi_amba_init()
> and acpi_amba_init() itself is called once during the initialisation.
> amba_dummy_clk can't be initialised before this in any other code
> path and hence the check for already registered amba_dummy_clk is
> not necessary. Drop the same.
>

You are not reading my response correctly and fixing all the issues.

1. You had v3 and now this is again v1 ? Perhaps v4 ?
2. You missed to add my Acked-by which I gave to your v2
3. This is v4 and new reviewers of this patch have absolutely no idea
   what got changed from v1->v2->v3->v4. It is always good to add change
   log describing what changed across these versions
4. I asked you to add ARM64 maintainers as we would request them to pick
   this up via ARM64 tree.
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>

I will ignore your patches if these are not fixed, I have told you same
thing twice now.

--
Regards,
Sudeep