Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] opp: Allow dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table() to return -EPROBE_DEFER

From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>, Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>,
	ulf.hansson@linaro.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
	Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>,
	Kevin Hilman <khilman@kernel.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org>,
	nks@flawful.org, Kukjin Kim <kgene@kernel.org>,
	Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@arm.com>,
	georgi.djakov@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Viresh Kumar <vireshk@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] opp: Allow dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table() to return -EPROBE_DEFER
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2020 10:17:48 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201019091723.GA12087@bogus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201019045827.kl6qnx6gidhzjkrs@vireshk-i7>

On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 10:28:27AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 16-10-20, 12:12, 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.
> > But this change now propagates that error to caller of dev_pm_opp_add
> > which means we can't add opp to a device if there are no clock providers.
> > This breaks for DVFS which don't operate separately with clocks and
> > regulators.
>
> The CPUs DT node shouldn't have a clock property in such a case and I
> would expect an error instead of EPROBE_DEFER then. Isn't it ?

Ideally yes, but for legacy reasons clocks property has been used for
providing OPP/DVFS handle too. While we can change and add new property
for that, it will still break old bindings.

--
Regards,
Sudeep

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel