[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <37aeea50-e149-44bc-87a8-9095afe29d42@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 07:34:07 +0100
From: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
To: Jagadeesh Kona <quic_jkona@...cinc.com>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
<sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>,
Vladimir Zapolskiy <vladimir.zapolskiy@...aro.org>,
Dmitry Baryshkov <lumag@...nel.org>
Cc: Ajit Pandey <quic_ajipan@...cinc.com>,
Imran Shaik <quic_imrashai@...cinc.com>, Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>,
Satya Priya Kakitapalli <quic_skakitap@...cinc.com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 06/18] clk: qcom: common: Add support to configure clk
regs in qcom_cc_really_probe
On 14/05/2025 20:08, Jagadeesh Kona wrote:
> + if (!pll->config || !pll->regs) {
> + pr_err("%s: missing pll config or regs\n", init->name);
> + continue;
> + }
If you are printing error, why aren't you returning error ?
I understand that it probably makes platform bringup easier if we print
instead of error here.
I think this should be a failure case with a -EINVAL or some other
indicator you prefer.
Assuming you amend to return an error you may add my
Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists