Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220920103108.23074-1-jay.xu@rock-chips.com> <20220920103108.23074-13-jay.xu@rock-chips.com>
 <CAMRc=MdjFbzjiLg==ppX_e7cWVw7s1B+Dd=OvrYsnL4ZC_daMg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMRc=MdjFbzjiLg==ppX_e7cWVw7s1B+Dd=OvrYsnL4ZC_daMg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>
Date:   Fri, 30 Sep 2022 11:28:23 +0200
Message-ID: <CAMRc=Md5jyvSc7RAHOQ9=d1TWhidTd0JppCmR8enK1ttPr2w3w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/20] gpio/rockchip: add return check for clock rate set
To:     Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@rock-chips.com>
Cc:     linus.walleij@linaro.org, heiko@sntech.de,
        andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, robert.moore@intel.com,
        robh@kernel.org, linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 11:17 AM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 12:31 PM Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@rock-chips.com> wrote:
> >
> > Check if the clock rate set for the apb clock is successful or not.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jianqun Xu <jay.xu@rock-chips.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c | 3 +++
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
> > index e36cdbd4bbef..511e93a6a429 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-rockchip.c
> > @@ -199,6 +199,9 @@ static int rockchip_gpio_set_debounce(struct gpio_chip *gc,
> >         if (bank->gpio_type == GPIO_TYPE_V2 && !IS_ERR(bank->db_clk)) {
> >                 div_debounce_support = true;
> >                 freq = clk_get_rate(bank->db_clk);
> > +               if (!freq)
> > +                       return -EINVAL;
> > +
> >                 max_debounce = (GENMASK(23, 0) + 1) * 2 * 1000000 / freq;
> >                 if (debounce > max_debounce)
> >                         return -EINVAL;
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
>
> This cannot happen, clk_get_rate() can only return 0 for clk == NULL.
> We're not using an optional clock.
>

Ah, sorry actually the db_clk can be NULL for certain variants. But in
that case shouldn't we just silently ignore it and return 0? Or return
-ENOTSUPP at the very least?

Bart