[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250829-fine-tacky-sturgeon-0ba3c4@sudeepholla>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 10:59:15 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
Cc: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] clk: scmi: migrate round_rate() to determine_rate()
On Fri, Aug 29, 2025 at 06:09:03PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 01:12:07PM -0400, Brian Masney wrote:
> >This driver implements both the determine_rate() and round_rate() clk
> >ops, and the round_rate() clk ops is deprecated. When both are defined,
> >clk_core_determine_round_nolock() from the clk core will only use the
> >determine_rate() clk ops.
> >
> >The existing scmi_clk_determine_rate() is a noop implementation that
> >lets the firmware round the rate as appropriate. Drop the existing
> >determine_rate implementation and convert the existing round_rate()
> >implementation over to determine_rate().
> >
> >scmi_clk_determine_rate() was added recently when the clock parent
> >support was added, so it's not expected that this change will regress
> >anything.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Peng,
It would be great if you can test it with parent clock support on i.MX
platforms just to be sure this doesn't regress anything.
--
Regards,
Sudeep
Powered by blists - more mailing lists