Re: [PATCH RFC v9 01/20] clk: divider: Correct parent clk round rate if no bestdiv is normally found

[Tomi Valkeinen]

On 12/02/15 15:41, Sascha Hauer wrote:

> Tomis patch is based on the assumption that clk_set_rate(clk_round_rate(rate))
> is equal to clk_round_rate(rate). So when this assumption is wrong then
> it should simply be reverted.

When is it not equal?

I agree that doing clk_set_rate(clk, clk_round_rate(clk, rate)) is
pointless, but shouldn't it still work?

And we can forget about clk_round_rate. Without my patch, this would
behave oddly also:

rate = clk_get_rate(clk);
clk_set_rate(clk, rate);

The end result could be something else than 'rate'.

 Tomi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature