[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c2e08821-c9e4-4b35-bc09-94dc38fb6012@broadcom.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2025 15:50:06 -0700
From: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Doug Berger <opendmb@...il.com>,
Broadcom internal kernel review list
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>, Russell King
<linux@...linux.org.uk>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: mdio: mdio-bcm-unimac: Correct rate fallback
logic
On 7/29/25 15:44, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 03:22:57PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>> On 7/29/25 15:20, Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jul 29, 2025 at 02:31:48PM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>> In case the rate for the parent clock is zero,
>>>
>>> Is there a legitimate reason the parent clock would be zero?
>>
>> Yes there is, the parent clock might be a gated clock that aggregates
>> multiple sub-clocks and therefore has multiple "parents" technically.
>> Because it has multiple parents, we can't really return a particular rate
>> (clock provider is SCMI/firmware).
>
> O.K. Maybe add this to the commit message?
That makes sense, v2 tomorrow, thanks!
--
Florian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists