linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: r8a7791: Don't disable referenced optional clocks

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160407232155.GH18567@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Thu, 7 Apr 2016 16:21:55 -0700
From:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To:	Sjoerd Simons <sjoerd.simons@...labora.co.uk>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>,
	linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: dts: r8a7791: Don't disable referenced optional
 clocks

On 04/06, Sjoerd Simons wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-04-06 at 15:11 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > CC Mike, Stephen, linux-clk (this time with the new Mike)
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:52 PM, Sjoerd Simons
> > <sjoerd.simons@...labora.co.uk> wrote:
> > > 
> > > clk_get on a disabled clock node will return EPROBE_DEFER, which
> > > can
> > > cause drivers to be deferred forever if such clocks are referenced
> > > in
> > > their clocks property.
> > Is this a side effect of commit 3e5dd6f6e690048d ("clk: Ignore
> > disabled DT
> > clock providers")?
> 
> Yes it seems so. Reverting that patch means that i can drop this one
> and get the expected behaviour again.

The DT is broken then? Is it possible to mark these status =
"okay" so that things work again?

> 
> Though even so I'm not sure what the convention is for clocks like
> these, the r8a7791.dtsi is inconsistent, as some are disabled while
> others (e.g. the audio clocks) are 0hz. Would be good to get some input
> on that regardless.
> 

What's the question here?

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