On 04/06, Sjoerd Simons wrote: > On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 15:11 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > CC Mike, Stephen, linux-clk (this time with the new Mike) > > > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Sjoerd Simons > > <sjoerd.simons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > clk_get on a disabled clock node will return EPROBE_DEFER, which > > > can > > > cause drivers to be deferred forever if such clocks are referenced > > > in > > > their clocks property. > > Is this a side effect of commit 3e5dd6f6e690048d ("clk: Ignore > > disabled DT > > clock providers")? > > Yes it seems so. Reverting that patch means that i can drop this one > and get the expected behaviour again. The DT is broken then? Is it possible to mark these status = "okay" so that things work again? > > Though even so I'm not sure what the convention is for clocks like > these, the r8a7791.dtsi is inconsistent, as some are disabled while > others (e.g. the audio clocks) are 0hz. Would be good to get some input > on that regardless. > What's the question here? -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html