Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 24 Nov 2016 15:39:48 +0800 | From | Xiaolong Zhang <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] clk: Register clkdev after setup of fixed-rate and fixed-factor clocks |
| |
On 三, 11月 23, 2016 at 04:38:33下午 -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 11/12, Xiaolong Zhang wrote: > > On 二, 10月 25, 2016 at 08:40:08下午 +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > On 10/22, Xiaolong Zhang wrote: > > > > On 四, 10月 20, 2016 at 04:01:03下午 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > > > On 10/11, Orson Zhai wrote: > > > > > > From: Xiaolong Zhang <xiaolong.zhang@spreadtrum.com> > > > > > > > > > > > > When common kernel setups fixed clock, of_clk_provider will be registerred. > > > > > > But there is no clkdev being registerred at the same time. This will make > > > > > > it difficult to get the clock by using clk_get(NULL, con_id). > > > > > > > > > > > > Add clkdev register for fixed-rate and fixed-factor clock and ignore > > > > > > the error if any. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Xiaolong Zhang <xiaolong.zhang@spreadtrum.com> > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Orson Zhai <orson.zhai@spreadtrum.com> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > Why are we using clkdev lookups for clks populated from DT? > > > > > Shouldn't we be able to point to them from the consumers that > > > > > would also be in DT? I'm a little lost. > > > > > > > > > The clk_get interface allows the first argument as NULL. We just assure > > > > consumers can get the clock from DT or by clock name. > > > > > > Ok. The first argument to clk_get() really shouldn't be NULL. It > > > should be the device pointer for the device that is associated > > > with the clk you want to get. The clock name (second argument to > > > clk_get()) should be device specific and not some globally unique > > > identifier. It seems that you're using the clk_get() API > > > incorrectly. > > > > > Sorry for late reply. > > There are two paths in clk_get: > > a) dev is not NULL, the calling procedure is as following > > clk_get(dev, con_id) > > --->of_clk_get_by_name(dev->of_node, con_id) > > > > b) dev is NULL, the calling procedure is as following > > clk_dev(NULL, con_id) > > --->clk_get_sys(NULL, con_id) > > --->clk_find(NULL, con_id) > > > > I just cann't understand why you say the first argument shouldn't > > be NULL. Is there other consideration in CCF? > > > > Passing NULL as the first argument is allowed, but that's mostly > an artifact of the clk_get() API. If you don't have a device, you > should be calling clk_get_sys() and then a clkdev lookup should > have been added with some appropriate dev_id string that is used > in the clk_get_sys() call. At least this is my understanding of > the clkdev APIs, but Russell is the authority here. >
I understand what you mean. If a driver uses the device tree, the consumers and providers have the fixed relationship. But I think clk_get() has a purpose is compatible with the non-DT driver.
> We're really off track now though. Can you please point to some > code that needs this change? If we're using DT then we should be > able to use the of_clk_*() path to find the clk. >
Actually, the requirement is raised by our GPU driver. In the early stage of the GPU DT driver, the GPU driver use the clk_get(NULL, con_id) to get the clock instance for compatible with non-DT GPU driver. The new driver have used the of_clk_get() instead of the clk_get. And we reserved the modification in clock.
Xiaolong Zhang Thanks > -- > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
| |