On Fri, 24 Dec 2010, Paul Mundt wrote: > On Thu, Dec 23, 2010 at 01:08:34AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Dec 2010, Paul Mundt wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 10:52:18AM +0100, Guennadi Liakhovetski wrote: > > > > @@ -356,7 +360,9 @@ static int __init sh_mipi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > goto emap; > > > > } > > > > > > > > - mipi->dsit_clk = clk_get(&pdev->dev, "dsit_clk"); > > > > + mipi->dev = &pdev->dev; > > > > + > > > > + mipi->dsit_clk = clk_get(NULL, "dsit_clk"); > > > > > > Why did you drop &pdev->dev from clk_get()? > > > > Because that clock is not associated with that device, it sisn't work > > correctly until now. You also cannot associate it with that device > > exclusively, because it serves two devices... > > > I'm not sure I see what the problem is. If there is no special lookup > matching this clock to the device pointer then the lookup will resolve to > whatever generically provides that clock. There is also nothing that > stops someone from providing the same clock to multiple devices via the > same lookup string, this is largely what clock lookups are for in the > first place. Any move away from a device pointer to clk_get() is a step > in the wrong direction. That device also has other clocks, so, previously, with the device pointer but with an unmatching device string I was getting a wrong clock - the one from the device... So, it is a step in the "right" direction in the sense, that I am now getting a correct clock. But yes, if I can associate one clock with several devices, that's even better! I'll try that. Thanks Guennadi --- Guennadi Liakhovetski, Ph.D. Freelance Open-Source Software Developer http://www.open-technology.de/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fbdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
