Hi,
On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 3:12 PM Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @@ -409,8 +410,9 @@ static void dsi_pll_28nm_destroy(struct msm_dsi_pll *pll)
> static int pll_28nm_register(struct dsi_pll_28nm *pll_28nm)
> {
> char *clk_name, *parent_name, *vco_name;
> + const char *ref_clk_name = __clk_get_name(pll_28nm->vco_ref_clk);
IMO for the 28nm PHY driver you should probably make things work OK
even if the "ref" clock wasn't supplied. In the spirit of the stable
device tree it would be nice (even if nobody actually ships device
trees separate from kernels). ...and also it makes the whole thing
easier to land. If you add compatibility here then the code and
device tree patch can go in separately.
Depending on what others think you could potentially spit some type of
warning in the logs if the ref clock wasn't specified though.
-Doug
