[U-Boot] [PATCH v1] clk: clk-uclass: Check ops pointer before use it

[Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>]

On 08/17/2016 09:53 PM, Wenyou.Yang at microchip.com wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stephen Warren [mailto:swarren at wwwdotorg.org]
>> Sent: 2016?8?18? 11:46
>> To: Wenyou Yang - A41535 <Wenyou.Yang@microchip.com>;
>> wenyou.yang at atmel.com
>> Cc: u-boot at lists.denx.de; swarren at nvidia.com; michal.simek at xilinx.com
>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v1] clk: clk-uclass: Check ops pointer before use it
>>
>> On 08/17/2016 06:30 PM, Wenyou.Yang at microchip.com wrote:
>>> HI Stephen,
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Stephen Warren [mailto:swarren at wwwdotorg.org]
>>>> Sent: 2016?8?17? 23:59
>>>> To: Wenyou Yang <wenyou.yang@atmel.com>
>>>> Cc: U-Boot Mailing List <u-boot@lists.denx.de>; Stephen Warren
>>>> <swarren@nvidia.com>; Michal Simek <michal.simek@xilinx.com>
>>>> Subject: Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v1] clk: clk-uclass: Check ops pointer
>>>> before use it
>>>>
>>>> On 08/17/2016 01:05 AM, Wenyou Yang wrote:
>>>>> Add check ops pointer before use it. Otherwise, it will cause the
>>>>> runtime error for the clk devices without ops callback.
>>>>
>>>> Other uclasses like reset, power domain, and mailbox don't do this.
>>>> All drivers must have an ops pointer, or they can't be useful. I'm
>>>> not sure this patch is necessary. Is it just a debugging aid so if
>>>> the driver writer forgets to set the ops pointer the system will
>>>> error out rather than crashing? If so, a post-bind hook in the uclass that
>> refuses the driver if it hasn't set the ops pointer would be better.
>>>
>>> Sorry, I don't agree with you.
>>>
>>> Not all drivers have an ops pointer.
>>>
>>> If you grep U_BOOT_DRIVER , you will find that there are some drivers without
>> an ops pointer.
>>>
>>> We should not suppose a driver should have something, I think.
>>
>> But without an ops pointer, the driver can do nothing and provide no services.
>> Why is that useful?
>
> There are some nodes without compatible in device tree,  as a child of some node,
> for example, pinctrl child node or for my code peripheral clock node.
>
> These nodes also need to be bound before using them. They require such driver to bind them.

That seems unrelated. A node without a compatible value won't 
instantiate a device object, and hence needs no driver.