From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755130AbcBWUSm (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2016 15:18:42 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:37733 "EHLO mail-wm0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754990AbcBWUSj (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Feb 2016 15:18:39 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: msm8916: Move smem below hwlock To: Srinivas Kandagatla , andy.gross@linaro.org References: <1456248071-30547-1-git-send-email-georgi.djakov@linaro.org> <56CC970B.4080602@linaro.org> <56CCA95C.9070207@linaro.org> <56CCB2E3.9050309@linaro.org> Cc: Georgi Djakov , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-soc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Georgi Djakov Message-ID: <56CCBE9B.5010209@linaro.org> Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2016 22:18:35 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56CCB2E3.9050309@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 23.02.16 г. 21:28, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: > > > On 23/02/16 18:47, Georgi Djakov wrote: >> On 23.02.16 г. 19:29, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 23/02/16 17:21, Georgi Djakov wrote: >>>> When the SMEM is probed it defers as it depends on the hardware lock, which >>>> is not available yet. But the SMD bus and RPM regulators and clocks depend >>>> on SMEM and they defer too. The problem with this is that the order of >>>> registering the devices is not optimal and also we may end with messed >>>> up serial console as the RPM clocks are not registered yet.. >>> I noticed the same issue but was wondering why would we end up with messed up serial console? >>> >>> Could you add more details on why serial console is messed up? >>> >>> I thought, serial driver has nothing to do with the rpm clocks directly! >>> >> >> If we don't have the rpm clocks registered, the uart clock is an orphan >> and when clk_get_rate() is called on orphan clocks it returns 0 as rate. > Shouldn't the actual uart clk provider registration fail/defer probe due to missing parent in this case? > Yes, this is a known issue and people are currently working on it. http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-clk/msg00065.html http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg475910.html