Hi Lee,
On Thu, 04 Dec 2014, Lee Jones wrote:
> ST's Common Clk Framework is now available. This patch ensures the FSM
> makes use of it by obtaining and enabling the EMI clock if provided. If
> system fails to provide the EMI clock FSM uses its original default
> rate.
<snip>
I'm not sure I understand this patch. Now that common clock framework
is available for STI platforms, why would the emi clock ever not be available?
If it is to maintain DT compatability then we are already breaking this with the
syscfg 'reg' DT changes which are coming up, and this was deemed OK as the
platform
is WIP.
IMO keeping this legacy code which assumes the bootloader / JTAG has enabled
and configured
the emi clock correctly is not worth it now that CCF is available for the
platform.
> - /* TODO: Make this dynamic */
> - emi_freq = STFSM_DEFAULT_EMI_FREQ;
> + if (!fsm->clk) {
> + dev_warn(fsm->dev,
> + "No EMI clock available. Using default 100MHz.\n");
> +
> + emi_freq = STFSM_DEFAULT_EMI_FREQ;
> + } else
> + emi_freq = clk_get_rate(fsm->clk);
>
> /*
> * Calculate clk_div - values between 2 and 128
> @@ -2057,6 +2064,15 @@ static int stfsm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> return PTR_ERR(fsm->base);
> }
>
> + fsm->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "emi_clk");
> + if (IS_ERR(fsm->clk)) {
> + dev_warn(fsm->dev, "Couldn't find EMI clock.\n");
> + fsm->clk = NULL;
> + } else if (clk_prepare_enable(fsm->clk)) {
> + dev_warn(fsm->dev, "Failed to enable EMI clock.\n");
If a clock has been provided and we fail to enable it, then surely that is game
over?
As the code currently is it then goes onto assume in stfsm_set_freq() that the
rate
is STFSM_DEFAULT_EMI_FREQ which can't be true if it can't enable the clock.
regards,
Peter.
--
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/
