Quoting Maxime Ripard (2022-11-04 06:17:17) > Hi, > > This is a follow-up to a previous series that was printing a warning > when a mux has a set_parent implementation but is missing > determine_rate(). > > The rationale is that set_parent() is very likely to be useful when > changing the rate, but it's determine_rate() that takes the parenting > decision. If we're missing it, then the current parent is always going > to be used, and thus set_parent() will not be used. The only exception > being a direct call to clk_set_parent(), but those are fairly rare > compared to clk_set_rate(). > > Stephen then asked to promote the warning to an error, and to fix up all > the muxes that are in that situation first. So here it is :) > > Let me know what you think, What's the plan here? Are you going to resend?
