From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752782AbbD3SoM (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:44:12 -0400
Received: from mail-wg0-f46.google.com ([74.125.82.46]:35219 "EHLO
	mail-wg0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752095AbbD3SoI (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:44:08 -0400
Message-ID: <554277F3.7060500@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 20:44:03 +0200
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0
To: Michael Welling <mwelling@ieee.org>, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
CC: Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@free.fr>,
        Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Russell King <rmk+linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] clk: si5351: Do not pass struct clk in platform_data
References: <1430415954-29517-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <1430415954-29517-4-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <CAOMZO5BYnE2epGrWbnNnaqEt1r6+xoPYWKtjc8w-Ze22aitgXA@mail.gmail.com> <20150430183043.GA21890@deathray>
In-Reply-To: <20150430183043.GA21890@deathray>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 30.04.2015 20:30, Michael Welling wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 03:20:38PM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth
>> <sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> @@ -1328,8 +1321,17 @@ static int si5351_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
>>>          i2c_set_clientdata(client, drvdata);
>>>          drvdata->client = client;
>>>          drvdata->variant = variant;
>>> -       drvdata->pxtal = pdata->clk_xtal;
>>> -       drvdata->pclkin = pdata->clk_clkin;
>>> +       drvdata->pxtal = devm_clk_get(&client->dev, "xtal");
>>> +       drvdata->pclkin = devm_clk_get(&client->dev, "clkin");
>>> +
>>> +       if (PTR_ERR(drvdata->pxtal) == -EPROBE_DEFER ||
>>> +           PTR_ERR(drvdata->pclkin) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>>> +               return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>>> +
>>> +       if (IS_ERR(drvdata->pxtal) && IS_ERR(drvdata->pclkin)) {
>>
>> Don't you want || instead?
>
> I doubt it. He is checking if both are not available.
>
> The driver could work with only one of them.
>
> If you use || then you assume to need both.

Fabio,

Michael is right, the check is for bailing out if none of the parent
clocks is available.

But thanks for looking at it and I appreciate the review.

Sebastian