netdev - RE: [PATCH v1 net-next 4/4] net: stmmac: setup higher frequency clk support for EHL & TGL

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <D6759987A7968C4889FDA6FA91D5CBC814758DB5@PGSMSX103.gar.corp.intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Aug 2019 10:38:50 +0000
From:   "Voon, Weifeng" <weifeng.voon@...el.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
CC:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
        "Giuseppe Cavallaro" <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...com>,
        "Ong, Boon Leong" <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 net-next 4/4] net: stmmac: setup higher frequency clk
 support for EHL & TGL

> > > +#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
> > >  #include <linux/pci.h>
> > >  #include <linux/dmi.h>
> > >
> > > @@ -174,6 +175,19 @@ static int intel_mgbe_common_data(struct
> pci_dev *pdev,
> > >  	plat->axi->axi_blen[1] = 8;
> > >  	plat->axi->axi_blen[2] = 16;
> > >
> > > +	plat->ptp_max_adj = plat->clk_ptp_rate;
> > > +
> > > +	/* Set system clock */
> > > +	plat->stmmac_clk = clk_register_fixed_rate(&pdev->dev,
> > > +						   "stmmac-clk", NULL, 0,
> > > +						   plat->clk_ptp_rate);
> > > +
> > > +	if (IS_ERR(plat->stmmac_clk)) {
> > > +		dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "Fail to register stmmac-clk\n");
> > > +		plat->stmmac_clk = NULL;
> >
> > Don't you need to propagate at least EPROBE_DEFER here?
> 
> Hi Florian
> 
> Isn't a fixed rate clock a complete fake. There is no hardware behind it.
> So can it return EPROBE_DEFER?
> 
>     Andrew

Yes, there is no hardware behind it. So, I don't think we need to deferred probe
and a warning message should be sufficient. Anyhow, please point it out if I miss
out anything.

Thanks.