From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail11.truemail.it (mail11.truemail.it [217.194.8.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EC33C2206B; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 10:54:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.194.8.81 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708944892; cv=none; b=A9fe1DbRJuvi1r3VGfXUv8or0yE2OV8Ipl2H+mi3+xoq51AX71WY3RlObegSm2AmOWr9NPhfdtkad2DAbQz3v8rtFPVu5xct2lMHT3zK/3tAIBlOHrP4aLyFppOil8NroRW88GTersjXXWN0xGaNVIspsh3J5RCNjMUCRPDyK/4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708944892; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YIwSNAafJiqNweT7ikfqNMKQNYGFU3GBRMLIFdVHe9E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ix9hUXGHxaBzWkAvr3LP6m5UZeEODVUTsnQS3pdj0gS7B3Jcaq9/uY2IbbjNX5rGkYipOo6vkgyxiaDoW7CREqHrXwDm0ywNPdx7T+BPLHsfAZC7J6tHKof+1CzndZECecpJDAVxBwfScQAPrcJH2H7vNa0uvMqu0GdaX8rCy9Q= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dolcini.it; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dolcini.it header.i=@dolcini.it header.b=wlTuwqC0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.194.8.81 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=dolcini.it Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=dolcini.it header.i=@dolcini.it header.b="wlTuwqC0" Received: from francesco-nb (93-49-2-63.ip317.fastwebnet.it [93.49.2.63]) by mail11.truemail.it (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 213CF1FA1B; Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:54:40 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dolcini.it; s=default; t=1708944880; bh=q3t+9DN4ngdFtdrD/shw1T/iqqp+imBFrdQtbCvoMSk=; h=From:To:Subject; b=wlTuwqC0H1O/peAc9lJ9z0cg3MH3qww3bF5PPCHKa/gsvJoHlJh6BeX6Yh1F/8JWN Gqy2TGXS7OigX0xx5ZjAZh8CUmLp1FRsV5HfS9g7FbYxQ4yUsdWO9eX58ccXUwu54G vhbbUewQ4cICT9YHsOUnSUZynO5pMgPkz2PNolQ9DoeEm6GnMZuIK4n2Nh58Gif3eK r3FSAz42CvOntdJVqU7Lb1htcNWEula22vbsU/EsgAF+PC611jRL6WQ1aQ4IlXOTLv yAtSDYjdIQ8/XTQ1WVQFDO8bTlnK99k8jVsYcHBGTYaDfHeGcmjWIxV7ixiWCNMMc9 oHvte4g8izPFg== Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2024 11:54:35 +0100 From: Francesco Dolcini To: Udit Kumar Cc: nm@ti.com, kristo@kernel.org, ssantosh@kernel.org, chandru@ti.com, rishabh@ti.com, kamlesh@ti.com, francesco@dolcini.it, vigneshr@ti.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, sboyd@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] clk: keystone: sci-clk: Adding support for non contiguous clocks Message-ID: <20240226105435.GA11908@francesco-nb> References: <20240213082640.457316-1-u-kumar1@ti.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240213082640.457316-1-u-kumar1@ti.com> On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 01:56:40PM +0530, Udit Kumar wrote: > Most of clocks and their parents are defined in contiguous range, > But in few cases, there is gap in clock numbers[0]. > Driver assumes clocks to be in contiguous range, and add their clock > ids incrementally. > > New firmware started returning error while calling get_freq and is_on > API for non-available clock ids. Is this the kind of errors I should expect in such situation? ti-sci-clk 44043000.system-controller:clock-controller: recalc-rate failed for dev=13, clk=7, ret=-19 If this is the case, I feel like this patch should be back-ported to stable kernels. Any malfunction because of these errors or just some noise in the logs? Francesco