Re: [PATCH 0/2 v3] Add pl031 RTC support for Hi6220

[Olof Johansson]

On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 11:55 PM, John Stultz <john.stultz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 10:22 PM, Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 05:48:43PM -0700, John Stultz wrote:
>>> This patchset enables the pl031 RTC on the Hi6220 SoC.
>>>
>>> I'd like to submit it to be merged.
>>>
>>> Wei has acked the second patch (modulo a whitespace fix which
>>> I've included in this v3), so it seems like both could go
>>> through the clk tree.
>>>
>>> But Wei also seemed open to pulling in a clk tree branch
>>> as it goes through arm-soc.
>>>
>>> Michael/Stephen: If there's no other objections, could you
>>> queue the first patch and make it avilable via the branch for
>>> Wei, or just take both patches?
>>
>> I happen to dread these kind of patchsets these days. There's added
>> dependencies across trees just because a defined name for the clock
>> number is added to a header file.
>>
>> I much prefer to use numerical clocks for one release, and then once
>> everything is in, switch over to the defines in the DTS.
>>
>> That way there are no dependencies, no need to setup a shared branch
>> for a simple 3-line patch, etc.
>>
>> So, mind respinning the DTS piece?
>
> Huh..

Sorry if it appeared random, I've complained about it for a while to
submaintainers. :)

> But trying to boot w/ the numerical clock in the DTS, without the clk
> change results in lots of noise:
> [  116.491458] of_clk_src_onecell_get: invalid clock index 37
> [  116.511627] of_clk_src_onecell_get: invalid clock index 38
>
> Is that acceptable?

Grmbl. Is it a lot of those? That's definitely not ideal either. If
it's one or two during probe (since clk_gets should ideally fail at
probe time) then I'd be less worried.


-Olof