From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Georgi Djakov Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] clk: qcom: common: Add API to register board clocks backwards compatibly Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 20:03:08 +0200 Message-ID: <56310DDC.6010000@linaro.org> References: <1445987100-19492-1-git-send-email-sboyd@codeaurora.org> <20151028010604.GV19782@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f45.google.com ([74.125.82.45]:35238 "EHLO mail-wm0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751673AbbJ1SJH (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Oct 2015 14:09:07 -0400 Received: by wmll128 with SMTP id l128so10437432wml.0 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2015 11:09:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20151028010604.GV19782@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-arm-msm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd , Mike Turquette Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 10/28/2015 03:06 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 10/27, Stephen Boyd wrote: >> + >> +int qcom_cc_register_board_clk(struct device *dev, const char *path, >> + const char *name, unsigned long rate) >> +{ >> + return _qcom_cc_register_board_clk(dev, path, name, rate, >> + !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_QCOM_RPMCC)); > > I just realized that we could have this config enabled but the > driver never probes on a certain platform. So we'll need to do > some sort of search to see if the rpmcc node exists and also > check to see if the driver is enabled. I guess we can do that all > here in this function as long as we have a compatible = > "qcom,rpmcc" as a more generic property for the rpm clock > controller node. So if the config is enabled, search the dt tree > for a qcom,rpmcc node. If the rpmcc node is there, the last > argument is false, otherwise it's true. I like the approach. We could have both compatible strings like: compatible = "qcom,rpmcc-msm8916", "qcom,rpmcc"; The only possible issue i could imagine is the case when rpmcc driver probe fails - does not enable scaling for example. Then we will be left without xo. But maybe we should not handle this scenario anyway. > > ---8<---- > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c > index 572851b5bc16..215a41ba0135 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/common.c > @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ > #include > #include > #include > +#include > > #include "common.h" > #include "clk-rcg.h" > @@ -152,7 +153,18 @@ static int _qcom_cc_register_board_clk(struct device *dev, const char *path, > int qcom_cc_register_board_clk(struct device *dev, const char *path, > const char *name, unsigned long rate) > { > - return _qcom_cc_register_board_clk(dev, path, name, rate, true); > + bool add_factor = true; > + struct device_node *node; > + > + /* The RPM clock driver will add the factor clock if present */ > + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_QCOM_RPMCC)) { > + node = of_find_compatible_node(NULL, NULL, "qcom,rpmcc"); > + if (node) if (node && of_device_is_available(node)) to handle also the case with status="disabled" > + add_factor = false; > + of_node_put(node); > + } > + > + return _qcom_cc_register_board_clk(dev, path, name, rate, add_factor); > } > EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(qcom_cc_register_board_clk); > >