On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Stephen Boyd <sb...@codeaurora.org> wrote: > On 10/03, Joel Stanley wrote: >> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 6:54 AM, Stephen Boyd <sb...@codeaurora.org> wrote: >> > On 09/21, Joel Stanley wrote: >> >> @@ -160,6 +191,104 @@ static struct clk_hw *aspeed_calc_pll(const char >> >> *name, u32 val) >> >> + /* >> >> + * Memory controller (M-PLL) PLL. This clock is configured by the >> >> + * bootloader, and is exposed to Linux as a read-only clock rate. >> >> + */ >> >> + regmap_read(map, ASPEED_MPLL_PARAM, &val); >> >> + aspeed_clk_data->hws[ASPEED_CLK_MPLL] = aspeed_calc_pll("mpll", >> >> val); >> >> + >> >> + /* SD/SDIO clock divider (TODO: There's a gate too) */ >> >> + hw = clk_hw_register_divider_table(NULL, "sdio", "hpll", 0, >> > >> > Please pass your dev pointer here from the platform device. >> > >> >> + scu_base + ASPEED_CLK_SELECTION, 12, 3, 0, >> >> + div_table, >> >> + &aspeed_clk_lock); >> > >> > And check for errors? Perhaps use devm_clk_hw_regsiter() APIs and >> > construct the dividers and muxes directly instead of using the >> > basic type registration APIs. >> >> Do you think that devm_ is overkill, given we will never unload this driver? > > Is probe defer going to happen? Even if unload can't happen, > probe defer is a concern unless that is also ruled out.
As I understand it, I will only get an EPROBE_DEFER if I'm requesting something from another driver? If that's the case then we can rule that out. >> >> Can you explain why you suggest to construct the structures directly >> instead of using the APIs? > > There aren't devm APIs for some of these basic clk type > registration functions. > >> >> I had a read of the basic type registration functions, and the >> relevant failure paths are memory allocation failures. If we're out of >> memory that early in boot then things have gone pretty bad. >> >> I can add checks for null and bail out; I don't think there's value in >> freeing the allocated memory: if a system can't load it's clock driver >> then it's super hosed. > > If we can't proceed without this driver because it's super hosed, > then perhaps we need to panic the system on errors here. Should > be simple enough to add some error checks and goto panic("Things > are super hosed"). Okay. I added checks in v4. Does that look ok you you? Cheers, Joel