[PATCH v6 7/7] pinctrl: qcom: Update clock voting as optional

[Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu (Temp)]

On 2/19/2022 8:16 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Thanks for Your time Stephen!!!
> Quoting Srinivas Kandagatla (2022-02-16 07:38:02)
>>
>> On 16/02/2022 14:41, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
>>> On 2/16/2022 7:50 PM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>>> Thanks for Your Time Srini!!!
>>>> On 14/02/2022 15:19, Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu wrote:
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7280-lpass-lpi.c
>>>>> b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7280-lpass-lpi.c
>>>>> index 5bf30d97..4277e31 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7280-lpass-lpi.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/qcom/pinctrl-sc7280-lpass-lpi.c
>>>>> @@ -143,6 +143,7 @@ static const struct lpi_pinctrl_variant_data
>>>>> sc7280_lpi_data = {
>>>>>        .ngroups = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_groups),
>>>>>        .functions = sc7280_functions,
>>>>>        .nfunctions = ARRAY_SIZE(sc7280_functions),
>>>>> +    .is_clk_optional = 1,
>>>> This is forcefully set assuming that sc7280 is always used in ADSP
>>>> bypass mode. Which is not correct.
>>>>
>>>> Can't you use devm_clk_bulk_get_optional instead?
>>> Yes. Agreed. Initially used devm_clk_bulk_get_optional, but Bjorn
>>> suggested for conditional check instead of optional.
>>>
>>> Again Shall we go for optional clock voting?
>> That means that the condition has to be dynamic based on the platform
>> using DSP or not. Which is impossible to deduce without some help from DT.
>>
>> I would prefer to stay with optional clock unless Bjorn has some strong
>> objection on not using int.
> I think we need the combination of optional API and bool flag. My
> understanding is it's optional on sc7280, but not on the previous
> revision, so we want to be very strict on previous revision and less
> strict on sc7280. Hence the flag. Maybe we should change it to
> clk_required and then assume optional going forward. Then the callsite
> can use one or the other API?
Okay.Will change accordingly.