On 2014/10/16 17:34, Mark Brown wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 05:16:02PM +0800, addy ke wrote: >> On 2014/10/15 21:04, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 07:25:49PM +0800, Addy Ke wrote: > >>>> + if (WARN_ON(rs->speed > MAX_SCLK_OUT)) >>>> + rs->speed = MAX_SCLK_OUT; > >>>> + /* the minimum divsor is 2 */ >>>> + if (rs->max_freq < 2 * rs->speed) { >>>> + clk_set_rate(rs->spiclk, 2 * rs->speed); >>>> + rs->max_freq = clk_get_rate(rs->spiclk); >>>> + } > >>> I'll apply this but you should be checking the return code from >>> clk_set_rate() here, please send a followup patch doing that. It might > >> If clk_set_rate return error, do I only put dev_warn here or return error value to spi core? > > It'd be better to return an error if we need to set the rate and can't > do it. > >>> also be worth consdering just setting the rate unconditionally here, it >>> seems like it should make things simpler. > >> I think we need. >> If we set the rate unconditionally here, clk_set_rate() will be executed in each spi transfer. > > Is that really such a high cost? > Not high cost, but I think if the default spi_clk is enough, we do not need to set spi_clk again. Maybe we can only set spi_clk as (2 * MAX_SCLK_OUT) in probe(). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html