[alsa-devel] [PATCH] ASoC: kirkwood: cleanup the external clock probe
This patch checks the return value of the clk_prepare_enable of the external clock and removes the test about a same internal and external clock which would quite never occur and won't work in most cases it would occur.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Francois Moine moinejf@free.fr --- This patch applies against broonie/sound for-next. --- sound/soc/kirkwood/kirkwood-i2s.c | 13 +++++-------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/soc/kirkwood/kirkwood-i2s.c.old b/sound/soc/kirkwood/kirkwood-i2s.c.pat2 index d0504a2..c2433ea 100644 --- a/sound/soc/kirkwood/kirkwood-i2s.c.old +++ b/sound/soc/kirkwood/kirkwood-i2s.c.pat2 @@ -500,14 +500,11 @@ static int kirkwood_i2s_dev_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) if (PTR_ERR(priv->extclk) == -EPROBE_DEFER) return -EPROBE_DEFER; } else { - if (priv->extclk == priv->clk) { - devm_clk_put(&pdev->dev, priv->extclk); - priv->extclk = ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); - } else { - dev_info(&pdev->dev, "found external clock\n"); - clk_prepare_enable(priv->extclk); - soc_dai = &kirkwood_i2s_dai_extclk; - } + dev_info(&pdev->dev, "found external clock\n"); + ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->extclk); + if (err < 0) + return err; + soc_dai = kirkwood_i2s_dai_extclk; }
/* Some sensible defaults - this reflects the powerup values */
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 09:46:13AM +0200, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
This patch checks the return value of the clk_prepare_enable of the external clock and removes the test about a same internal and external clock which would quite never occur and won't work in most cases it would occur.
NAK. It can occur.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 09:06:57 +0100 Russell King - ARM Linux linux@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 09:46:13AM +0200, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
This patch checks the return value of the clk_prepare_enable of the external clock and removes the test about a same internal and external clock which would quite never occur and won't work in most cases it would occur.
NAK. It can occur.
In which case? And, what would be the right treatment?
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 10:28:34AM +0200, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 09:06:57 +0100 Russell King - ARM Linux linux@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 09:46:13AM +0200, Jean-Francois Moine wrote:
This patch checks the return value of the clk_prepare_enable of the external clock and removes the test about a same internal and external clock which would quite never occur and won't work in most cases it would occur.
NAK. It can occur.
In which case? And, what would be the right treatment?
priv->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL); priv->extclk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "extclk");
Supplying the first clock to this driver without a separate "extclk" via clkdev will return it as the second clock.
Again, NAK. Your change is against the principles of the clk API.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 09:52:00 +0100 Russell King - ARM Linux linux@arm.linux.org.uk wrote:
NAK. It can occur.
In which case? And, what would be the right treatment?
priv->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL); priv->extclk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "extclk");Supplying the first clock to this driver without a separate "extclk" via clkdev will return it as the second clock.
Again, NAK. Your change is against the principles of the clk API.
You are right.
Mark, please forget about this patch.
Thanks.
participants (2)
-
Jean-Francois Moine -
Russell King - ARM Linux