From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daniel Lezcano Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] clk: hi6220: Add the hi655x's pmic clock Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 21:47:37 +0200 Message-ID: <20170419194737.GB2523@mai> References: <1491683412-12237-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> <20170412150245.GK7065@codeaurora.org> <20170416205713.GW2078@mai> <20170419160005.GS7065@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170419160005.GS7065@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd Cc: mturquette@baylibre.com, lee.jones@linaro.org, xuwei5@hisilicon.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 09:00:05AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 04/16, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 08:02:45AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > On 04/08, Daniel Lezcano wrote: [ ... ] > > > > + ret = clk_hw_register_clkdev(&hi655x_clk->clk_hw, clk_name, NULL); > > > > > > Missed this last time. Do you use this clkdev lookup? The name is > > > usually supposed to be based on what the device is expecting, > > > instead of clk_name, and we would want some device name for the > > > third argument here. > > > > I'm not sure to get your comment. Are you saying the clk_name should be the > > third argument? > > > > > > Sorry, no. I meant that con_id is typically something like "core" > or "ahb" or something like that, and dev_id is something like > "a456002.pmic_device" or whatever dev_name(pmic_dev) would return for > the consuming device. That way when we call clk_get(dev, "core") > it will find the lookup with "core" and "a456002.pmic_device" to > match up the clk lookup. > > If anything, the clk_name should just go into the con_id for now, > and then it will need to be a globally unique identifier for the > clk. But that is going against how clkdev is supposed to be used. > Hence the question if you even need to use it. If not, just don't > add it. I can fix up v3 of this patch to put clk_name back at > con_id if you like. No need to resend. Ok, I'm not very used with the CCF, so perhaps clk_name is not needed at all. I gave a try with the following combination: - con_id = NULL, dev_id = clk_name - con_id = clk_name, dev_id = NULL - con_id = NULL, dev_id = NULL All worked. And finally I removed the clk_hw_register_clkdev() call and it worked also. So I'm not sure about this function. Any idea ? > -- > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog