On Thu, 2016-04-07 at 16:21 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 04/06, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 15:11 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > >
> > > CC Mike, Stephen, linux-clk (this time with the new Mike)
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Sjoerd Simons
> > > <sjoerd.simons@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > clk_get on a disabled clock node will return EPROBE_DEFER,
> > > > which
> > > > can
> > > > cause drivers to be deferred forever if such clocks are
> > > > referenced
> > > > in
> > > > their clocks property.
> > > Is this a side effect of commit 3e5dd6f6e690048d ("clk: Ignore
> > > disabled DT
> > > clock providers")?
> > Yes it seems so. Reverting that patch means that i can drop this
> > one
> > and get the expected behaviour again.
> The DT is broken then? Is it possible to mark these status =
> "okay" so that things work again?
> >
> >
> > Though even so I'm not sure what the convention is for clocks like
> > these, the r8a7791.dtsi is inconsistent, as some are disabled while
> > others (e.g. the audio clocks) are 0hz. Would be good to get some
> > input
> > on that regardless.
> >
> What's the question here?
So the question is how to model unconnected external clocks in device-
tree.
The dtsi we're loooking at has (in pseudo dt):
device {
clock-names = "internal", "external";
clocks = <&internal, &external>
};
external {
compatible = "fixed-clock";
clock-frequency = <12345>;
status = "disabled";
};
Before 3e5dd6f6e690048d ("clk: Ignore disabled DT clock providers")
this apparently worked. Afterwards drivers getting all the clocks would
fail to probe with -EPROBE_DEFER.
Judging by your comment I assume this way of modelling it is broken
(and the behaviour caused by the patch is correct)?
And as a follow-up, is modelling unconnected clocks as enabled with a
frequency of 0hz as my proposed patch does seen as the right way of
doing things?
--
Sjoerd Simons
Collabora Ltd.
