Dear Sudeep-san, >-----Original Message----- >From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com> >Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 3:39 PM >To: Dien Pham <dien.pham...@renesas.com> >Cc: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; Stephen >Boyd <sb...@kernel.org>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Michael Turquette ><mturque...@baylibre.com>; Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com> >Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] clk: scmi: Fix min and max rate when registering >clocks with discrete rates > >On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 08:26:54AM +0000, Dien Pham wrote: >> Hi Sudeep, >> >> Thanks for your patch. >> >> >-----Original Message----- >> >From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com> >> >Sent: Thursday, July 9, 2020 3:17 PM >> >To: linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org; linux-...@vger.kernel.org; >> >Stephen Boyd <sb...@kernel.org> >> >Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com>; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; >> >Michael Turquette <mturque...@baylibre.com>; Dien Pham >> ><dien.pham...@renesas.com> >> >Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] clk: scmi: Fix min and max rate when registering >> >clocks with discrete rates >> > >> >Currently we are not initializing the scmi clock with discrete rates >> >correctly. We fetch the min_rate and max_rate value only for clocks with >> >ranges and ignore the ones with discrete rates. This will lead to wrong >> >initialization of rate range when clock supports discrete rate. >> > >> >Fix this by using the first and the last rate in the sorted list of the >> >discrete clock rates while registering the clock. >> > >> >Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200708110725.18017-2-sudeep.ho...@arm.com >> >Fixes: 6d6a1d82eaef7 ("clk: add support for clocks provided by SCMI") >> >Reported-by: Dien Pham <dien.pham...@renesas.com> >> >Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com> >> >--- >> > drivers/clk/clk-scmi.c | 22 +++++++++++++++++++--- >> > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> > >> >Hi Stephen, >> > >> >If you are fine, I can take this via ARM SoC along with the change in >> >firmware driver. However it is also fine if you want to merge this >> >independently as there is no strict dependency. Let me know either way. >> > >> >v1[1]->v2: >> > - Fixed the missing ; which was sent by mistake. >> >> I tested the patch, >> I is ok and can fix my issue. >> > >Thanks for testing. Can I add ? > >Tested-by: Dien Pham <dien.pham...@renesas.com>
It is ok. Thanks, Best regard, DIEN Pham
