Re: [PATCH 2/3] firmware: qcom: scm: Remove core, iface and bus clocks dependency

[Sarangdhar Joshi]

On 11/01/2016 04:11 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 10/28, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:
> > @@ -380,33 +384,43 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_is_available);
> >  static int qcom_scm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  {
> >  	struct qcom_scm *scm;
> > +	uint64_t clks;
> >  	int ret;
> >
> >  	scm = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*scm), GFP_KERNEL);
> >  	if (!scm)
> >  		return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > -	scm->core_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "core");
> > -	if (IS_ERR(scm->core_clk)) {
> > -		if (PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > -			return PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk);
> > +	clks = (uint64_t)of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
> > +	if (clks & SCM_HAS_CORE_CLK) {
> > +		scm->core_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "core");
> > +		if (IS_ERR(scm->core_clk)) {
> > +			if (PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> > +				return PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk);
> >
> > -		scm->core_clk = NULL;
> > +			scm->core_clk = NULL;
> > +		}
> >  	}
> >
> >  	if (of_device_is_compatible(pdev->dev.of_node, "qcom,scm")) {
>
> Why didn't this also get added to the flags feature? I'd prefer
> we either use of_device_is_compatible() for everything, or device
> data to figure out what quirks to apply.

You're right. These flags are already added for "qcom,scm" compatible. 
We can modify this to honor data flags only. I hope it's okay to update 
it in the same patch?

Regards,
Sarang

> > -		scm->iface_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "iface");
> > -		if (IS_ERR(scm->iface_clk)) {
> > -			if (PTR_ERR(scm->iface_clk) != -EPROBE_DEFER)


--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project