Re: [PATCH 0/7] clk: at91: sckc: improve error path
Date: Thu Jun 20 2019 - 06:36:03 EST
On 18.06.2019 12:55, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> On 13/06/2019 15:37:06+0000, Claudiu.Beznea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> This series tries to improve error path for slow clock registrations
>> by adding functions to free resources and using them on failures.
> Does the platform even boot when the slow clock is not available?
> The TCB clocksource would fail at:
> tc.slow_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(node->parent, "slow_clk");
> if (IS_ERR(tc.slow_clk))
> return PTR_ERR(tc.slow_clk);
In case of using TC as clocksource, yes, the platform wouldn't boot if slow
clock is not available, because, anyway the TC needs it. PIT may work
without it (if slow clock is not used to drive the PIT).
For sure there are other IPs (which may be or are driven by slow clock)
which may not work if slow clock is driven them.
Anyway, please let me know if you feel this series has no meaning.
>> It is created on top of patch series at .
>> Thank you,
>> Claudiu Beznea
>>  https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1558433454-27971-1-git-send-email-claudiu.beznea@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>> Claudiu Beznea (7):
>> clk: at91: sckc: add support to free slow oscillator
>> clk: at91: sckc: add support to free slow rc oscillator
>> clk: at91: sckc: add support to free slow clock osclillator
>> clk: at91: sckc: improve error path for sam9x5 sck register
>> clk: at91: sckc: remove unnecessary line
>> clk: at91: sckc: improve error path for sama5d4 sck registration
>> clk: at91: sckc: use dedicated functions to unregister clock
>> drivers/clk/at91/sckc.c | 122 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
>> 1 file changed, 86 insertions(+), 36 deletions(-)