Quoting Marijn Suijten (2021-08-26 12:16:57) > Hi Stephen, > > On 8/26/21 8:47 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2021-08-25 13:45:17) > >> Using parent_data and parent_hws, instead of parent_names, does protect > >> against some cases of incompletely defined clock trees. While it turns > >> out that the bug being chased this time was totally unrelated, this > >> patch converts the SDM660 GCC driver to avoid such issues. > >> > >> The "xo" fixed_factor clock is unused within the gcc driver, but > >> referenced from the DSI PHY. So it's left in place until the DSI driver > >> is updated. > >> > >> Tested-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Reviewed-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Reviewed-by: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > > > > Applied to clk-next after moving back the arrays so the diff is smaller. > > > > Unfortunately the arrays cannot be moved back up since they (for the > most part) reference gpll clocks in `.hw = &gpll*` fields - these have > to be defined first or forward-declared otherwise, which is why the > arrays were moved down in the first place. > > The general structure nowadays seems to place these parent maps/data > right above the clock that uses them, making it easier to read. > Yes I applied a patch that only moved the arrays around first.
