[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Return checks for clock calls
Hi Abel,

On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 6:49 AM, Abel Vesa <> wrote:
> Hi Shawn, Fabio,
> I'm trying to get the imx clks changes upstreamed. To that end, I reached this
> old commit that adds some wrappers over the generic clk API. Here is the commit
> message:
> ARM: imx6: add return check for clock calls
> There are a bunch of clk_enable_prepare, clk_set_parent and clk_set_rate
> calls in imx6 clock driver's initialization. They are called without
> retunr check. If there is something going wrong with the calls, they
> will just fail silently.
> The patch creates a set of helper functions imx_clk_enable_prepare,
> imx_clk_set_parent and imx_clk_set_rate, and use them instead from clock
> initialization to check the return and print error message to tell
> failures if any.
> Signed-off-by: Shawn Guo <>
> And it adds the imx_clk_set_parent, imx_clk_prepare_enable and
> imx_clk_set_rate which basically just print an error message if the generic
> functions have failed.
> The only plus of these wrappers is that we at least see that the generic
> functions have failed, but the behaviour is not changed in any way.
> Question is, do we want this upstreamed considering that we need to replace the
> calls throughout all the older imx socs ?

IMHO we should not introduce these new helper functions.

We can simply explicitly check for errors with the existing clock
functions when needed.

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-24 01:28    [W:0.048 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site