From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752448AbbALImY (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 12 Jan 2015 03:42:24 -0500
Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([92.198.50.35]:47669 "EHLO
	metis.ext.pengutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752420AbbALImU (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 12 Jan 2015 03:42:20 -0500
Message-ID: <1421052137.3081.4.camel@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] clk: Do not complain about correctly set read-only
 muxes when assigning clock parents from device tree
From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        kernel@pengutronix.de
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 09:42:17 +0100
In-Reply-To: <54B0233C.60201@codeaurora.org>
References: <1420559120-17405-1-git-send-email-p.zabel@pengutronix.de>
		 <54AEF788.3060401@codeaurora.org>
	 <1420815016.3914.16.camel@pengutronix.de> <54B0233C.60201@codeaurora.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.9-1 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:67c:670:100:96de:80ff:fec2:9969
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: p.zabel@pengutronix.de
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on metis.ext.pengutronix.de); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
X-PTX-Original-Recipient: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Am Freitag, den 09.01.2015, 10:51 -0800 schrieb Stephen Boyd:
> On 01/09/2015 06:50 AM, Philipp Zabel wrote:
> > Hi Stephen,
> >
> > Am Donnerstag, den 08.01.2015, 13:32 -0800 schrieb Stephen Boyd:
> > [...]
> >> 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;
> > "[PATCH] clk: make set_parent succeed for any clock if the parent to be
> > set is the same as the current parent" ?
> >
> > It works, but it also changes the API, as it makes
> >    clk_set_parent(some_non_mux, its_current_parent)
> > succeed instead of return -ENOSYS.
> 
> I would think a non_mux clk would have clk->num_parents == 1, so I don't
> see how it would return -ENOSYS here. What you mention should succeed
> today. Otherwise we have a bug.

Right. In that case, I'm all for it.

regards
Philipp