On 19.03.2014 10:01, Sachin Kamat wrote:
On 19 March 2014 14:29, Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 16:14:53 +0100, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On 18.03.2014 12:09, Cho KyongHo wrote:
On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 20:52:43 +0530, Sachin Kamat wrote:
Hi KyongHo,
On 14 March 2014 10:35, Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
This patch uses managed device helper functions in the probe().
Signed-off-by: Cho KyongHo <pullip.cho@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
[snip]
+ data->clk = devm_clk_get(dev, "sysmmu");
+ if (IS_ERR(data->clk)) {
+ dev_info(dev, "No gate clock found!\n");
+ data->clk = NULL;
+ }
Why aren't you returning from here upon error?
It is for the case of a System MMU which does not need clock gating.
Are there really such cases?
Yes.
Especially in the case of initial stage of new SoC development.
I have experianced some software workaround for H/W restriction
needs prevention of clock gating for some devices.
So aren't these basically some exceptions/hacks rather than the usual way
of functioning of the device?
This actually raises a good question, whether we really need to support
such early development SoC versions in mainline.
Another thing is that if you need to assure that a clock is ungated, you
must acquire it and prepare_enable explicitly, so I don't think this
kind of handling is correct.
Best regards,
Tomasz
--
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
