[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161020235401.GG26139@codeaurora.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2016 16:54:01 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Sarangdhar Joshi <spjoshi@...eaurora.org>
Cc: Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Trilok Soni <tsoni@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: Add support for xo clock
On 10/20, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:
> Add xo clock support required for Qualcomm ADSP
> Peripheral Image Loader.
Yes but why is xo needed?
> @@ -223,6 +232,17 @@ static irqreturn_t adsp_stop_ack_interrupt(int irq, void *dev)
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> +static int adsp_init_clock(struct qcom_adsp *adsp)
> +{
> + adsp->xo = devm_clk_get(adsp->dev, "xo");
> + if (IS_ERR(adsp->xo)) {
> + dev_err(adsp->dev, "failed to get xo clock");
What if it's a probe defer error? Probably best to just be
silent/debug level, or we need a specific test for EPROBE_DEFER
and then silence in that case.
> + return PTR_ERR(adsp->xo);
> + }
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists