On 10/09, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> @@ -946,6 +946,7 @@ unsigned long __clk_round_rate(struct clk *clk, unsigned long rate)
> {
> unsigned long parent_rate = 0;
> struct clk *parent;
> + struct clk_hw *parent_hw;
>
> if (!clk)
> return 0;
> @@ -956,7 +957,7 @@ unsigned long __clk_round_rate(struct clk *clk, unsigned long rate)
>
> if (clk->ops->determine_rate)
> return clk->ops->determine_rate(clk->hw, rate, &parent_rate,
> - &parent);
> + &parent_hw);
We should assign the value of parent_hw somewhere here so that
drivers don't need to if they want the current parent. This would
match the current behavior where parent is already assigned the
current parent.
> else if (clk->ops->round_rate)
> return clk->ops->round_rate(clk->hw, rate, &parent_rate);
> else if (clk->flags & CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT)
> @@ -1345,6 +1346,7 @@ static struct clk *clk_calc_new_rates(struct clk *clk, unsigned long rate)
> {
> struct clk *top = clk;
> struct clk *old_parent, *parent;
> + struct clk_hw *parent_hw;
> unsigned long best_parent_rate = 0;
> unsigned long new_rate;
> int p_index = 0;
> @@ -1362,7 +1364,8 @@ static struct clk *clk_calc_new_rates(struct clk *clk, unsigned long rate)
> if (clk->ops->determine_rate) {
> new_rate = clk->ops->determine_rate(clk->hw, rate,
> &best_parent_rate,
> - &parent);
> + &parent_hw);
> + parent = parent_hw->clk;
Same comment here.
> } else if (clk->ops->round_rate) {
> new_rate = clk->ops->round_rate(clk->hw, rate,
> &best_parent_rate);
>
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
