Re: [PATCH 2/3] firmware: qcom: scm: Remove core, iface and bus clocks dependency

[Sarangdhar Joshi <spjoshi@codeaurora.org>]

On 11/01/2016 04:11 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 10/28, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:
>> @@ -380,33 +384,43 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(qcom_scm_is_available);
>>  static int qcom_scm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  {
>>  	struct qcom_scm *scm;
>> +	uint64_t clks;
>>  	int ret;
>>
>>  	scm = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*scm), GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (!scm)
>>  		return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> -	scm->core_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "core");
>> -	if (IS_ERR(scm->core_clk)) {
>> -		if (PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> -			return PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk);
>> +	clks = (uint64_t)of_device_get_match_data(&pdev->dev);
>> +	if (clks & SCM_HAS_CORE_CLK) {
>> +		scm->core_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "core");
>> +		if (IS_ERR(scm->core_clk)) {
>> +			if (PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
>> +				return PTR_ERR(scm->core_clk);
>>
>> -		scm->core_clk = NULL;
>> +			scm->core_clk = NULL;
>> +		}
>>  	}
>>
>>  	if (of_device_is_compatible(pdev->dev.of_node, "qcom,scm")) {
>
> Why didn't this also get added to the flags feature? I'd prefer
> we either use of_device_is_compatible() for everything, or device
> data to figure out what quirks to apply.

You're right. These flags are already added for "qcom,scm" compatible. 
We can modify this to honor data flags only. I hope it's okay to update 
it in the same patch?

Regards,
Sarang

>
>> -		scm->iface_clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "iface");
>> -		if (IS_ERR(scm->iface_clk)) {
>> -			if (PTR_ERR(scm->iface_clk) != -EPROBE_DEFER)
>


-- 
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project