On 01/06/2015 07:45 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c b/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> index aad4796..bb4dc02 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> @@ -62,10 +62,13 @@ static int __set_clk_parents(struct device_node *node,
> bool clk_supplier)
> goto err;
> }
>
> - rc = clk_set_parent(clk, pclk);
> - if (rc < 0)
> - pr_err("clk: failed to reparent %s to %s: %d\n",
> - __clk_get_name(clk), __clk_get_name(pclk), rc);
> + if (pclk != __clk_get_parent(clk)) {
> + rc = clk_set_parent(clk, pclk);
> + if (rc < 0)
> + pr_err("clk: failed to reparent %s to %s: %d\n",
> + __clk_get_name(clk),
> + __clk_get_name(pclk), rc);
> + }
> clk_put(clk);
> clk_put(pclk);
> }
Why not do this in the core? As far as I can tell other drivers could
run into the same problem, no? Does this work?
-----8<-------
diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
index f4963b7d4e17..3278645f4729 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
@@ -1677,16 +1677,18 @@ int clk_set_parent(struct clk *clk, struct clk *parent)
if (!clk)
return 0;
- /* verify ops for for multi-parent clks */
- if ((clk->num_parents > 1) && (!clk->ops->set_parent))
- return -ENOSYS;
-
/* prevent racing with updates to the clock topology */
clk_prepare_lock();
if (clk->parent == parent)
goto out;
+ /* verify ops for for multi-parent clks */
+ if ((clk->num_parents > 1) && (!clk->ops->set_parent)) {
+ ret = -ENOSYS;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
/* check that we are allowed to re-parent if the clock is in use */
if ((clk->flags & CLK_SET_PARENT_GATE) && clk->prepare_count) {
ret = -EBUSY;
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
--
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/
