| Message ID | 1391589458-28018-3-git-send-email-jjhiblot@traphandler.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Quoting Jean-Jacques Hiblot (2014-02-05 00:37:36) > From: Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon@overkiz.com> > > System clks are just gates, and thus do not provide any rate operations. > Authorize clk rate change to be propagated to system clk parents. > > Signed-off-by: Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon@overkiz.com> > --- > drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c > index 8f7c043..a98557b 100644 > --- a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c > @@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ at91_clk_register_system(struct at91_pmc *pmc, const char *name, > * (see drivers/memory) which would request and enable the ddrck clock. > * When this is done we will be able to remove CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag. > */ > - init.flags = CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; > + init.flags = CLK_SET_RATE_GATE | CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | Just wanted to do a quick sanity check here. Do you really need CLK_SET_RATE_GATE? Otherwise these patches look fine. Regards, Mike > + CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; > > sys->id = id; > sys->hw.init = &init; > -- > 1.8.5.2 >
Hi Mike, On 27/02/2014 01:42, Mike Turquette wrote: > Quoting Jean-Jacques Hiblot (2014-02-05 00:37:36) >> From: Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon@overkiz.com> >> >> System clks are just gates, and thus do not provide any rate operations. >> Authorize clk rate change to be propagated to system clk parents. >> >> Signed-off-by: Boris BREZILLON <b.brezillon@overkiz.com> >> --- >> drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c | 3 ++- >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c >> index 8f7c043..a98557b 100644 >> --- a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c >> +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c >> @@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ at91_clk_register_system(struct at91_pmc *pmc, const char *name, >> * (see drivers/memory) which would request and enable the ddrck clock. >> * When this is done we will be able to remove CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag. >> */ >> - init.flags = CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; >> + init.flags = CLK_SET_RATE_GATE | CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | > Just wanted to do a quick sanity check here. Do you really need > CLK_SET_RATE_GATE? After taking a closer look, I'd say I don't need this flag, because it's already set on programmable clks, am I right ? Do you want me to send a new version removing this flag ? > Otherwise these patches look fine. > > Regards, > Mike > >> + CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; >> >> sys->id = id; >> sys->hw.init = &init; >> -- >> 1.8.5.2 >>
diff --git a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c index 8f7c043..a98557b 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c +++ b/drivers/clk/at91/clk-system.c @@ -84,7 +84,8 @@ at91_clk_register_system(struct at91_pmc *pmc, const char *name, * (see drivers/memory) which would request and enable the ddrck clock. * When this is done we will be able to remove CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag. */ - init.flags = CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; + init.flags = CLK_SET_RATE_GATE | CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | + CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; sys->id = id; sys->hw.init = &init;