[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20220114224132.4F9E5C36AE9@smtp.kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:41:30 -0800
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech>
Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@...el.com>,
David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
Dave Stevenson <dave.stevenson@...pberrypi.com>,
Phil Elwell <phil@...pberrypi.com>,
Tim Gover <tim.gover@...pberrypi.com>,
Dom Cobley <dom@...pberrypi.com>,
Emma Anholt <emma@...olt.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] clk: Introduce a clock request API
Quoting Maxime Ripard (2022-01-14 08:15:56)
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 01:44:25PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> > I don't see a problem with re-evaluating the rate every time we call
> > clk_set_rate_range(). That's probably the bug that I can't recall. Can
> > you fix the API so it works that way?
>
> Yep, I'll work on it next week.
BTW, this is an area that's easily tested with kunit. I'm going to
re-post kunit tests for clk-gate.c today. We should add unit tests for
this and other parts of clk.c so that future changes don't break this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists