Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 16:32:57 +0300
From:   Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@iki.fi>
To:     Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
Cc:     Robert Foss <robert.foss@linaro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <maxime@cerno.tech>, linux-media@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        Dongchun Zhu <dongchun.zhu@mediatek.com>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
        Tomasz Figa <tfiga@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 2/3] media: ov8856: Add devicetree support
Message-ID: <20200430133257.GM867@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk>
References: <20200429162437.2025699-1-robert.foss@linaro.org>
 <20200429162437.2025699-3-robert.foss@linaro.org>
 <20200430093524.GB2188@pengutronix.de>
 <20200430094549.GF867@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk>
 <20200430095332.GC2188@pengutronix.de>
 <20200430095907.GG867@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk>
 <20200430101157.GD2188@pengutronix.de>
 <20200430102018.GI867@valkosipuli.retiisi.org.uk>
 <20200430120740.GG2188@pengutronix.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200430120740.GG2188@pengutronix.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 02:07:41PM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote:
> On 20-04-30 13:20, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 12:11:57PM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > > On 20-04-30 12:59, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > Hi Marco,
> > > > 
> > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:53:32AM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > > > > Hi Sakari,
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 20-04-30 12:45, Sakari Ailus wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Marco,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Thu, Apr 30, 2020 at 11:35:24AM +0200, Marco Felsch wrote:
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > 
> > > > > > > > -	if (mclk != OV8856_MCLK) {
> > > > > > > > -		dev_err(dev, "external clock %d is not supported", mclk);
> > > > > > > > -		return -EINVAL;
> > > > > > > > +	if (!is_acpi_node(fwnode)) {
> > > > > > > > +		ov8856->xvclk = devm_clk_get(dev, "xvclk");
> > > > > > > > +		if (IS_ERR(ov8856->xvclk)) {
> > > > > > > > +			dev_err(dev, "could not get xvclk clock (%pe)\n",
> > > > > > > > +					ov8856->xvclk);
> > > > > > > > +			return PTR_ERR(ov8856->xvclk);
> > > > > > > > +		}
> > > > > > > > +
> > > > > > > > +		clk_set_rate(ov8856->xvclk, xvclk_rate);
> > > > > > > > +		xvclk_rate = clk_get_rate(ov8856->xvclk);
> > > > > > > >  	}
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Why do we handle the clock only in DT case? Is there a problem with the
> > > > > > > clock handling and ACPI?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Not really, it's just that ACPI does not provide an interface to the clocks
> > > > > > as such.
> > > > > 
> > > > > But you will get a clk by devm_clk_get()?
> > > > 
> > > > No, because ACPI does not expose one to drivers. Effectively the entire
> > > > power sequences are implemented in ACPI, not in the driver.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Ah okay, thanks for the explanation. I'm really not into the ACPI
> > > stuff.. So this means the __power_off / power_on should only be done if
> > > we are using DT's?
> > 
> > Correct. That's why it bails out early. It could be yet earlier though,
> > without doing anything.
> 
> Yes I see. For easier and error less prone handling I would prefer:
> 
> if (is_acpi_node())
> 	return 0;
> 
> as first instruction for __power_off/on().
> 
> Also I would refator the ov8856_check_hwcfg() so the common part can be
> used by this function and by a ov8856_parse_of() function. But thats
> only my opinion.

I guess it could be the same function, up to you.

-- 
Sakari Ailus