From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC940C433E7 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 09:59:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46FD52237B for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 09:59:40 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="CBFdSEfJ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728718AbgJTJ7j (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 05:59:39 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54734 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729522AbgJTJ7j (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 05:59:39 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x543.google.com (mail-pg1-x543.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::543]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70F23C0613D1 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 02:59:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x543.google.com with SMTP id j7so774324pgk.5 for ; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 02:59:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=NENYQ/eLjN+kod9n/Z7W2983/x5NgkU6/c+e1AeVxFs=; b=CBFdSEfJP5VkIIITqJlKx4yDwQWRMUByg7hRU3V6oQnIZFayB9saU8yPWEeqqVarA7 Svg2TyX6boRcM9lNiOQmUR3MO1lysPy/JwSRhGTjgy1mfseoHM4waskxFWVxxpvq0mrC e0fXiVkRLhvyOqzBfor+B/yYUYjPMbMA+bwuOSgWaND1nQFCUqfql7XI6pSu/WraFedX 4TXma4aAGudK6Nl0lri5gQdkFxVAo50aktjFPDcshE1wvhdweeWbi56L+t23seEjF1Nq YnlOmDc+LlD590ZPWEnWPd0zlSJ82h4gzkhJq0YZHy1+J+vCnic325VPjAahqqPkYKTV uKZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=NENYQ/eLjN+kod9n/Z7W2983/x5NgkU6/c+e1AeVxFs=; b=XitFaXOYbj4sCqvWmWLQvv45Kq5z5OXBzv9JtCDNjLaa4YATh2mP16DJPjo/cIvYQX P8p9vbaWeVUiUNr8Ehc+8fW/JFc+lHm8wIZ+uNySXLez0Rvtf3DP0aRCyroFOJ7B1wAN BMJJJRk9MreBjF1tzTIVQCuxcOG8GfwwN3fJ0qWEaS6aTjVjyxdfqYsYQz5zUxMR5llE MgoIZlsC054JNoDQIA2+xXQRAf98UnQPDn3XpezYxKAdPST9x/q0ALoLf3ts1VmHtkXe OxG+BJ13zeQawveLSQAiE0fHIWl5yGJVi+dJ7vny0IUVErH6XMYQdG/4rEe7eTzQOtfw f/Wg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533Y6lFdBeNrDtHEhuTniBuzO8PyS6OJeEI9fmfvvWyRa3BTvVt0 EeQ77HTuyiDzkhh/4OaJ9OzQpQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxzVYB15h5YaGeEL9se/fR4WCYPH/ZQqp3XJb26uBr6gmCf2vPkZ3wlfY2tWdVPgvsG2FFQfQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:ea0b:: with SMTP id c11mr2013473pgi.213.1603187978786; Tue, 20 Oct 2020 02:59:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([122.181.54.133]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m3sm1407008pjv.52.2020.10.20.02.59.37 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 20 Oct 2020 02:59:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 15:29:35 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: Sudeep Holla Cc: ulf.hansson@linaro.org, "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Kevin Hilman , Pavel Machek , Len Brown , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Viresh Kumar , Nishanth Menon , Stephen Boyd , Kukjin Kim , Krzysztof Kozlowski , linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Guittot , nks@flawful.org, georgi.djakov@linaro.org, Stephan Gerhold , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 1/2] opp: Allow dev_pm_opp_get_opp_table() to return -EPROBE_DEFER Message-ID: <20201020095935.2ttoked5tozvcr24@vireshk-i7> References: <20201019091723.GA12087@bogus> <20201019092411.b3znjxebay3puq2j@vireshk-i7> <20201019101241.GB12908@bogus> <20201019103535.ksp5ackoihamam4g@vireshk-i7> <20201019141007.GA6358@bogus> <20201020050557.a3b2nk33eeyxnvl2@vireshk-i7> <20201020055431.ln7d57x76f7z6j5k@vireshk-i7> <20201020093745.GA10604@bogus> <20201020094134.natqnyp4zpfw3p5p@vireshk-i7> <20201020095205.GB10604@bogus> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201020095205.GB10604@bogus> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org On 20-10-20, 10:52, Sudeep Holla wrote: > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 03:11:34PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 20-10-20, 10:37, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 20, 2020 at 11:24:32AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > On 20-10-20, 10:35, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > > On 19-10-20, 15:10, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2020 at 04:05:35PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > > > > > > On 19-10-20, 11:12, Sudeep Holla wrote: > > > > > > > > Yes it has clocks property but used by SCMI(for CPUFreq/DevFreq) and not > > > > > > > > by any clock provider driver. E.g. the issue you will see if "clocks" > > > > > > > > property is used instead of "qcom,freq-domain" on Qcom parts. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Okay, I understand. But what I still don't understand is why it fails > > > > > > > for you. You have a clocks property in DT for the CPU, the OPP core > > > > > > > tries to get it and will get deferred-probed, which will try probing > > > > > > > at a later point of time and it shall work then. Isn't it ? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope unfortunately. We don't have clock provider, so clk_get will > > > > > > never succeed and always return -EPROBE_DEFER. > > > > > > > > > > Now this is really bad, you have a fake clocks property, how is the > > > > > OPP core supposed to know it ? Damn. > > > > > > > > What about instead of fixing the OPP core, which really is doing the > > > > right thing, we fix your driver (as you can't fix the DT) and add a > > > > dummy CPU clk to make it all work ? > > > > > > > > > > I really would avoid that. I would rather change the binding as there is > > > no single official users of that binding in the upstream tree. > > > > But how will you solve backward compatibility thing then ? > > > > I am just betting on the fact that no users upstream means no backward > compatibility needed. If someone raises issue we need to add backward > compatibility with dummy clk as you suggested. Okay. I would have done a change in the OPP core to fix the issue, but the current code looks correct and we shouldn't change it to satisfy buggy users. I hope that makes sense. -- viresh