On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 04:42:23PM +0800, Ken Xue wrote: > On Wed, 2015-10-21 at 10:28 +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 09:11:33AM +0800, Ken Xue wrote: > > > On Tue, 2015-10-20 at 14:17 +0300, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 02:38:01PM +0800, Ken Xue wrote: > > > > > DW I2C driver tries to register a clk from id->driver_data as an > > > > > alternative way besides intel lpss. But code doesn't register the > > > > > clk to clkdev. So, devm_clk_get will fail during probe. > > > > > > > > > > The patch can fix this issue. > > > > > > > > Since you now have drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c for AMD ACPI stuff, can you > > > > create the clock there just like we do for Intel stuff? > > > Sure. APD already creates the clock for AMD0010 as you expected. And the > > > next patch([PATCH 2/2] i2c: designware: remove freq definition for > > > "AMD0010" in acpi_device_id) is dropping the old way for getting freq. > > > > So this patch is not necessary, right? > Even though there is no use case that getting freq from id->driver_data, > But if we want to keep this design, then we should use current patch for > fixing the potential issue. So, the patch is nice to have.
What potential issue? If you pass clock from drivers/acpi/acpi_apd.c and drop the hard coded freq for AMD0010 in the I2C designware driver, the driver still works just fine. > Otherwise, we have to revert whole old design(a445900c). Yes please :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
