On 05/01/2018 08:46 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
On Friday 27 April 2018 05:47 AM, David Lechner wrote:
PLL0 on davinci/da850-type device needs to be registered early in boot
because it is needed for clocksource/clockevent. Change the driver
to use CLK_OF_DECLARE for this special case.

Signed-off-by: David Lechner <da...@lechnology.com>
---

v9 changes:
- new patch in v9


  drivers/clk/davinci/pll-da850.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++++----
  drivers/clk/davinci/pll.c       |  4 +++-
  drivers/clk/davinci/pll.h       |  2 +-
  3 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/davinci/pll-da850.c b/drivers/clk/davinci/pll-da850.c
index 00a6ece7b524..743527de1da2 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/davinci/pll-da850.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/davinci/pll-da850.c
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@
  #include <linux/init.h>
  #include <linux/kernel.h>
  #include <linux/mfd/da8xx-cfgchip.h>
+#include <linux/mfd/syscon.h>
+#include <linux/of_address.h>
  #include <linux/of.h>
  #include <linux/types.h>
@@ -135,11 +137,27 @@ static const struct davinci_pll_sysclk_info *da850_pll0_sysclk_info[] = {
        NULL
  };
-int of_da850_pll0_init(struct device *dev, void __iomem *base, struct regmap *cfgchip)
+void of_da850_pll0_init(struct device_node *node)
  {
-       return of_davinci_pll_init(dev, dev->of_node, &da850_pll0_info,
-                                  &da850_pll0_obsclk_info,
-                                  da850_pll0_sysclk_info, 7, base, cfgchip);
+       void __iomem *base;
+       struct regmap *cfgchip;
+
+       base = of_iomap(node, 0);
+       if (!base) {
+               pr_err("%s: ioremap failed\n", __func__);
+               return;
+       }
+
+       cfgchip = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("ti,da830-cfgchip");
+       if (IS_ERR(cfgchip)) {
+               pr_warn("%s: failed to get cfgchip (%ld)\n", __func__,
+                       PTR_ERR(cfgchip));
+               cfgchip = NULL;
+       }

Is this error handling for cfgchip needed here considering
davinci_pll_clk_register() already checks and warns.

Ah, good point. I'll clean this up.


Reply via email to