On Thu, 7 Apr 2022 at 13:24, Maxime Ripard <maxime@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'm not sure if it's feasible, but if it is, it looks like something > > > that could be fixed by the patch pasted here: > > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-clk/20220401122736.5yvanksa4pla7uql@houat/ > > > Could you test it? > > > > I have tested the single line patch and reported problems not fixed. > > Could you test this branch? > https://github.com/mripard/linux/tree/rpi/clk-improvements-more-fixes I have tested your tree and branch. I saw more clk prints in the boot log and did not notice the reported warning. [ 0.734195] clk_set_rate_range_nolock: qdss: orphan ? n [ 0.734222] clk_set_rate_range_nolock: qdss: core req rate 0 [ 0.734235] clk_set_rate_range_nolock: qdss: clamped rate 0 [ 0.734249] clk_core_set_rate_nolock: qdss: rate 0 [ 0.734262] clk_core_set_rate_nolock: qdss: rounded rate 0 ... [ 3.574169] clk_set_rate_range_nolock: gcc_ufs_phy_ice_core_clk: orphan ? n [ 3.581271] clk_set_rate_range_nolock: gcc_ufs_phy_ice_core_clk: core req rate 300000000 [ 3.589446] clk_set_rate_range_nolock: gcc_ufs_phy_ice_core_clk: clamped rate 300000000 [ 3.597521] clk_core_set_rate_nolock: gcc_ufs_phy_ice_core_clk: rate 300000000 ... Please refer this link for detail boot log, https://lkft.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/4861930#L2712 Build link https://builds.tuxbuild.com/27SxYLYlZcKEUQGVbmnmLP3GxEp/ - Naresh > > Thanks! > Maxime -- Linaro LKFT https://lkft.linaro.org
