From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 024D7C433E7 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:29:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79D9920866 for ; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:29:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="ApFm4KnG"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (2048-bit key) header.d=gerhold.net header.i=@gerhold.net header.b="eTW6BjmE" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 79D9920866 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gerhold.net Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=VW5mOKqMFyQyP7hpuKxvGTKFlLGP5jxtsgXCzyLe1l8=; b=ApFm4KnGAXmFIwZMJn7vnTPyF rBab46gk/ETaxQWO5e2/asO/w0N6DCOfveWBfChK+rXHENDtvYn1DTkk9hKz5D08l3WWDa7uRbQpb nSVpSydBkTiue0DzhrS4HJIH8WBNrZpSZjqQYciCGOgXnq0QfaFPYaLlYix72pHqfNiKqN4VFaSoe sfOjj+pXBT3fkGTgs14YH8PVbZzadRZDhfVwOHkODDVeVi0dVXY7P4PcRWIwtL/Kvel/7X1C7bWSE YUfcmye0KR4nOzoWtl9P2DhyvtaAiEYrm2fe5oMmNl00u9v7lKQeSOATe/v7uuSXENa0M9YiYa7Nz 2/Uyoue0w==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kTReT-0007cX-PL; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:28:17 +0000 Received: from mo4-p01-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([85.215.255.50]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kTReQ-0007bb-WA for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 16 Oct 2020 15:28:16 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1602862092; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=gerhold.net; h=In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=RHHm2GRiu7U5GkLRxa3++Z6B/X0hzwPc1UHjyWgcsfg=; b=eTW6BjmENF53RLFYkTD5iUBNT6mLmPnxxmqWgeKjn4wZUDztuU99cxsFXL2lk+bDDe xPnl721cbf3q5i7tcNGqSdxUJ4VxKY3C/KUrY6aH0iZL5L7XLHK0hXlyFCVNvbSgjKvX O6nKe1WlBNRABvc8PKafRLHPxtFjSmFdoOeJag1b5mAQAMfouksVlyn9k9IcM87lU36V iYK0Xu8oV9Gdbc5+rRM8xL5dsNTlXUO11hWsrRWUwmRLknKgmJRxUSuvhC8YBJCUM+lh KmGKFeZ9s1YhztniBOlFZcqbokprVlUTqp7F4ulqDP4NbZPE6fqFE/rIEKWM8acDB0sK fFzw== X-RZG-AUTH: ":P3gBZUipdd93FF5ZZvYFPugejmSTVR2nRPhVOQ/OcYgojyw4j34+u26zEodhPgRDZ8jxIc2p" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from gerhold.net by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 47.2.1 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id 509a5aw9GFS7bjx (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate); Fri, 16 Oct 2020 17:28:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2020 17:28:02 +0200 From: Stephan Gerhold To: Sudeep Holla Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] opp: Allow dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table() to return -EPROBE_DEFER Message-ID: <20201016152802.GA3966@gerhold.net> References: <24ff92dd1b0ee1b802b45698520f2937418f8094.1598260050.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <20201015180555.gacdzkofpibkdn2e@bogus> <20201016042434.org6ibdqsqbzcdww@vireshk-i7> <20201016060021.sotk72u4hioctg7o@bogus> <20201016111222.lvakbmjhlrocpogt@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201016111222.lvakbmjhlrocpogt@bogus> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201016_112815_228168_154D0EE9 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.28 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Nishanth Menon , Len Brown , ulf.hansson@linaro.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Guittot , Kevin Hilman , Stephen Boyd , Viresh Kumar , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski , nks@flawful.org, Kukjin Kim , Pavel Machek , Greg Kroah-Hartman , georgi.djakov@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Viresh Kumar Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:12:22PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 07:00:21AM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 09:54:34AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > On 15-10-20, 19:05, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > > OK, this breaks with SCMI which doesn't provide clocks but manage OPPs > > > > directly. Before this change clk_get(dev..) was allowed to fail and > > > > --EPROBE_DEFER was not an error. > > > > > > I think the change in itself is fine. We should be returning from > > > there if we get EPROBE_DEFER. The question is rather why are you > > > getting EPROBE_DEFER here ? > > > > > > > Ah OK, I didn't spend too much time, saw -EPROBE_DEFER, just reverted > > this patch and it worked. I need to check it in detail yet. > > > > You confused me earlier. As I said there will be no clock provider > registered for SCMI CPU/Dev DVFS. > opp_table->clk = clk_get(dev, NULL); > will always return -EPROBE_DEFER as there is no clock provider for dev. Shouldn't it return -ENOENT if there is no clock for the SCMI case? With -EPROBE_DEFER I would expect that it shows up at some point. I tried to avoid a situation like this by ignoring all errors != -EPROBE_DEFER. So if clk_get(dev, NULL) would return -ENOENT everything should work as expected... Thanks, Stephan _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel