[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fd5300fd-33af-babe-95d0-9669b66a8c06@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 02:13:36 +0300
From: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To: Sowjanya Komatineni <skomatineni@...dia.com>,
thierry.reding@...il.com, jonathanh@...dia.com, frankc@...dia.com,
hverkuil@...all.nl, sakari.ailus@....fi, helen.koike@...labora.com
Cc: sboyd@...nel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v10 6/9] media: tegra: Add Tegra210 Video input driver
24.04.2020 06:55, Sowjanya Komatineni пишет:
> +static int __maybe_unused vi_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
> +{
> + struct tegra_vi *vi = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> + int ret;
> +
> + ret = regulator_enable(vi->vdd);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to enable VDD supply: %d\n", ret);
> + return ret;
> + }
> +
> + ret = clk_set_rate(vi->clk, vi->soc->vi_max_clk_hz);
> + if (ret) {
> + dev_err(dev, "failed to set vi clock rate: %d\n", ret);
> + goto disable_vdd;
> + }
Isn't setting clock rate using assigned-clocks in a device-tree enough?
Could you please clarify why this vi_max_clk_hz is needed?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists