Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] clk: meson: a1: add support for Amlogic A1 clock driver

Jerome Brunet
2019-11-25T10:14:59Z

On Thu 21 Nov 2019 at 04:21, Jian Hu <jian.hu@amlogic.com> wrote:

> Hi, Jerome
>
> On 2019/11/20 23:35, Jerome Brunet wrote:
>>
>> On Wed 20 Nov 2019 at 10:28, Jian Hu <jian.hu@amlogic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, jerome
>>>
>>> Is there any problem about fixed_pll_dco's parent_data?
>>>
>>> Now both name and fw_name are described in parent_data.
>>
>> Yes, there is a problem. This approach is incorrect, as I've tried to
>> explain a couple times already. Let me try to re-summarize why this
>> approach is incorrect.
>>
>> Both fw_name and name should be provided when it is possible that
>> the DT does not describe the input clock. IOW, it is only for controllers
>> which relied on the global name so far and are now starting to describe
>> the clock input in DT
>>
>> This is not your case.
>> Your controller is new and DT will have the correct
>> info
>>
>> You are trying work around an ordering issue by providing both fw_name
>> and name. This is not correct and I'll continue to nack it.
>>
>> If the orphan clock is not reparented as you would expect, I suggest you
>> try to look a bit further at how the reparenting of orphans is done in
>> CCF and why it does not match your expectation.
>>
> I have debugged the handle for orphan clock in CCF, Maybe you are missing
> the last email.

Nope, got it the first time

> Even though the clock index exit, it will get failed for the orphan clock's
> parent clock due to it has not beed added to the provider.

If the provider is not registered yet, of course any query to it won't
work. This why I have suggested to this debug *further* :

* Is the orphan reparenting done when a new provider is registered ?
* If not, should it be done ? is this your problem ?