Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] clk: improve handling of orphan clocks

[Stephen Boyd]

On 04/22, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> Using orphan clocks can introduce strange behaviour as they don't have
> rate information at all and also of course don't track 
> 
> This v2/v3 takes into account suggestions from Stephen Boyd to not try to
> walk the clock tree at runtime but instead keep track of orphan states
> on clock tree changes and making it mandatory for everybody from the
> start as orphaned clocks should not be used at all.
> 
> 
> This fixes an issue on most rk3288 platforms, where some soc-clocks
> are supplied by a 32khz clock from an external i2c-chip which often
> is only probed later in the boot process and maybe even after the
> drivers using these soc-clocks like the tsadc temperature sensor.
> In this case the driver using the clock should of course defer probing
> until the clock is actually usable.
> 
> 
> As this changes the behaviour for orphan clocks, it would of course
> benefit from more testing than on my Rockchip boards. To keep the
> recipent-list reasonable and not spam to much I selected one (the topmost)
> from the get_maintainer output of each drivers/clk entry.
> Hopefully some will provide Tested-by-tags :-)
> 

<grumble> I don't see any Tested-by: tags yet </grumble>. I've
put these two patches on a separate branch "defer-orphans" and
pushed it to clk-next so we can give it some more exposure.

Unfortunately this doesn't solve the orphan problem for non-OF
providers. What if we did the orphan check in __clk_create_clk()
instead and returned an error pointer for orphans? I suspect that
will solve all cases, right?

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/