[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20191003160130.5A19B222D0@mail.kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2019 09:01:29 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Taniya Das <tdas@...eaurora.org>, robh+dt@...nel.org
Cc: David Brown <david.brown@...aro.org>,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] clk: qcom: Add Global Clock controller (GCC) driver for SC7180
Quoting Taniya Das (2019-10-03 03:31:15)
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On 10/1/2019 8:08 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> > Why do you want to keep them critical and registered? I'm suggesting
> > that any clk that is marked critical and doesn't have a parent should
> > instead become a register write in probe to turn the clk on.
> >
> Sure, let me do a one-time enable from probe for the clocks which
> doesn't have a parent.
> But I would now have to educate the clients of these clocks to remove
> using them.
>
If anyone is using these clks we can return NULL from the provider for
the specifier so that we indicate there isn't support for them in the
kernel. At least I hope that code path still works given all the recent
changes to clk_get().
Powered by blists - more mailing lists