Hi Gilad,
On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:48 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
> <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 3:43 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef <gilad@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
>>> <geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> Indeed. From a quick glance, it looks like drivers/crypto/ccree/cc_driver.c
>>>> does not distinguish between the absence of the clock property, and an
>>>> actual error in getting the clock, and never considers any error a failure
>>>> (incl. -PROBE_DEFER).
>>>>
>>>> As of_clk_get() returns -ENOENT for both a missing clock property and a
>>>> missing clock, you should use (devm_)clk_get() instead, and distinguish
>>>> between NULL (no clock property) and IS_ERR() (actual failure -> abort).
>>>
>>> I was trying to do as you suggested but I didn't quite get what is the
>>> dev_id (2nd) parameter to devm_clk_get parameter is supposed to be.
>>
>> It's the (optional) name of the clock, helpful in case there is more than one.
>> In your case, NULL is fine.
>
> I have assumed as much and tried it, it did not work and so I assumed
> I am missing something and asked you.
> It turns out I was missing the fact I was using the wrong device tree
> file... :-(
>
> So thanks, it works now :-)
Glad to hear that!
> Having said that, while using devm)clk_get() is a better approach, it
> does not seems to distinguish
> between no "clocks" and a failure to clock information - it returns
> ENOENT in both cases as well.
Oh right, I guess I'm too used to not even getting that far due to the PM
Domain code failing to obtain the clock...
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
