Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] clk: meson: a1: add support for Amlogic A1 clock driver | | From | Jian Hu <> | | Date | Mon, 25 Nov 2019 20:01:56 +0800 |
| |
On 2019/11/25 18:14, Jerome Brunet wrote: > > On Thu 21 Nov 2019 at 04:21, Jian Hu <jian.hu@amlogic.com> wrote: > >> Hi, Jerome >> >> On 2019/11/20 23:35, Jerome Brunet wrote: >>> >>> On Wed 20 Nov 2019 at 10:28, Jian Hu <jian.hu@amlogic.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, jerome >>>> >>>> Is there any problem about fixed_pll_dco's parent_data? >>>> >>>> Now both name and fw_name are described in parent_data. >>> >>> Yes, there is a problem. This approach is incorrect, as I've tried to >>> explain a couple times already. Let me try to re-summarize why this >>> approach is incorrect. >>> >>> Both fw_name and name should be provided when it is possible that >>> the DT does not describe the input clock. IOW, it is only for controllers >>> which relied on the global name so far and are now starting to describe >>> the clock input in DT >>> >>> This is not your case. >>> Your controller is new and DT will have the correct >>> info >>> >>> You are trying work around an ordering issue by providing both fw_name >>> and name. This is not correct and I'll continue to nack it. >>> >>> If the orphan clock is not reparented as you would expect, I suggest you >>> try to look a bit further at how the reparenting of orphans is done in >>> CCF and why it does not match your expectation. >>> >> I have debugged the handle for orphan clock in CCF, Maybe you are missing >> the last email. > > Nope, got it the first time > >> Even though the clock index exit, it will get failed for the orphan clock's >> parent clock due to it has not beed added to the provider. > > If the provider is not registered yet, of course any query to it won't > work. This why I have suggested to this debug *further* : > > * Is the orphan reparenting done when a new provider is registered ? > * If not, should it be done ? is this your problem ? > Yes, the orphan reparenting is done when the new provider is registered.
Reparenting the orphan will be done when each clock is registered by devm_clk_hw_register. And at this time the provider has not been registered. After all clocks are registered by devm_clk_hw_register, the provider will be registered by devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider.
Reparenting the orphan will fail when fw_name is added alone, the couse is that devm_clk_hw_register is always running ahead of devm_of_clk_add_hw_provider.
That is why it will failed to get parent for the orphan clock.
> > . >
|  |