Hi Sakari,
On Mon, Sep 19, 2022 at 06:33:12AM +0000, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> Hi Tommaso,
>
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2022 at 03:34:01PM +0200, Tommaso Merciai wrote:
> > > >> + ret = clk_set_rate(ov4689->xvclk, OV4689_XVCLK_FREQ);
> > > >> + if (ret < 0) {
> > > >> + dev_err(dev, "Failed to set xvclk rate (24MHz)\n");
> > > >> + return ret;
> > > >> + }
> > > >> + if (clk_get_rate(ov4689->xvclk) != OV4689_XVCLK_FREQ)
> > > >> + dev_warn(dev, "xvclk mismatched, modes are based on 24MHz\n");
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What do you think about?
> > > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately, I have no experience with ACPI-based devices. :(
> > >
> > > Do you mean that in the case of an ACPI device and devm_clk_get_optional
> > > returning NULL we should assume that the clock is already enabled and
> > > will stay enabled during sensor operation? How should we distinguish it
> > > from the case of an OF-based system and clock just missing from device
> > > tree?
> >
> > Not exaclty :)
> >
> > I copy comment from [1]
> >
> > if you use ov5693->xvclk to identify the ACPI vs OF use case shouldn't
> > you use the get_optionl() version ? Otherwise in the ACPI case you will have
> > -ENOENT if there's not 'xvclk' property and bail out.
> >
> > Unless my understanding is wrong on ACPI we have "clock-frequency" and
> > on OF "xvclk" with an "assigned-clock-rates",
>
> Generally yes. It's also possible to have a clock in ACPI based system
> although those clocks do not come from ACPI. See e.g.
> drivers/platform/x86/intel/int3472/clk_and_regulator.c .
I save this :)
Thanks for sharing.
Regards,
Tommaso
>
> --
> Sakari Ailus
--
Tommaso Merciai
Embedded Linux Engineer
tommaso.merciai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
__________________________________
Amarula Solutions SRL
Via Le Canevare 30, 31100 Treviso, Veneto, IT
T. +39 042 243 5310
info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
www.amarulasolutions.com
