From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: b.brezillon@overkiz.com (boris brezillon) Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2013 21:06:10 +0200 Subject: [PATCH v3 6/7] USB: ohci-at91: add usb_clk for transition to common clk framework In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <51E599A2.3040306@overkiz.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 16/07/2013 20:47, Alan Stern wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jul 2013, boris brezillon wrote: > >>>> + uclk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "usb_clk"); >>>> + if (IS_ERR(uclk)) { >>>> + uclk = NULL; >>>> + dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "failed to get usb_clk\n"); >>>> + } >>> Is this really what you want for backward compatibility? >> Here are some proposition to remove the warning message: >> >> 1) replace it with a dev_info and change the message: >> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "failed to get usb_clk (most likely using old >> at91 clk implementation)\n"); >> 2) drop the log and silently ignore the missing clk (I'm not a big fan >> of this solution >> as it may lead to some errors if we're using new clk implem and the >> clock is really missing) >> 3) rework the current clk_set_rate function to accept clk_set_rate on >> usb clk and add clk_lookup entries >> for the usb clk (I'm not a big fan of this solution neither as this >> modifications will only be used for a short time >> until the transition to common clk framework is completed). > Another possibility is to combine this change with the clock > implementation update, and do them in a single patch. Then backward > compatibility would not be an issue. Yes, that was one of the question I asked in the cover-letter. I think I'll move these patches in the "move to common clk" series. Thanks > Alan Stern >