[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220630101540.5dafkegrmcattt2c@vireshk-i7>
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2022 15:45:40 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>
Cc: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
Viresh Kumar <vireshk@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org" <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] OPP: Allow multiple clocks for a device
On 30-06-22, 12:57, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> The set_freq_table() gets available freqs using
> dev_pm_opp_find_freq_ceil() iteration.
>
> The first dev_pm_opp_find_freq_ceil(freq=0) succeeds and returns ceil
> freq=1.
I don't see how this can possibly happen. One possibility is that freq
is set to 0 and one the next loop you do freq++, which can make it 1.
> The second dev_pm_opp_find_freq_ceil(freq=1) fails with -ERANGE.
Even if we send freq = 1, I don't see how we can get ERANGE if the OPP
table is properly initialized.
> I haven't looked yet at why freq is set to 1.
Thanks, but I would need some help to get it debugged.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists