>> Would you like to adjust such exception handling another bit? > > Nope. > > The big difference is that clocks rely heavily on their names to establish > the clock tree parentship. So the PLL cannot work without the name This error situation got a specific reaction. > but can provide some means of functionality without the rate-table > especially as bootloaders do generally initialize a PLL to some form of > sane frequency. I imagine that a choice is available here for the error handling strategy. * Return “ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM)” as a strict response like in the other error case. * Fix the setting “pll->rate_count” at least (to be a bit more tolerant). Would any system users wonder then about the availability of only a single frequency (instead of possibly expected alternatives)? Regards, Markus
