MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230301012506.1401883-1-saravanak@google.com>
 <31ae9957edf319416d4551f14eba2071.sboyd@kernel.org> <7cca9a24b24d849565cd6a4f40ddbee9.sboyd@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <7cca9a24b24d849565cd6a4f40ddbee9.sboyd@kernel.org>
From:   Saravana Kannan <saravanak@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 1 Mar 2023 13:25:13 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGETcx82r-YC7cBUY5xa57FCEOUP_BeGNp2zURG=HUJkUMSVPA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] clk: Mark a fwnode as initialized when using
 CLK_OF_DECLARE* macros
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        kernel-team@android.com, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Mar 1, 2023 at 12:48=E2=80=AFPM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wro=
te:
>
> Quoting Stephen Boyd (2023-03-01 12:40:03)
> > Quoting Saravana Kannan (2023-02-28 17:25:06)
> > > The CLK_OF_DECLARE macros sometimes prevent the creation of struct
> > > devices for the device node being handled. It does this by
> > > setting/clearing OF_POPULATED flag. This can block the probing of som=
e
> > > devices because fw_devlink will block the consumers of this node till=
 a
> > > struct device is created and probed.
> >
> > Why can't you use CLK_OF_DECLARE_DRIVER()?
>
> Ah I misunderstood. CLK_OF_DECLARE() _always_ prevents the creation of a
> struct device for the device node being handled. The 'sometimes' threw
> me off.

The "sometimes" is because dependending on the macro we go back and
clear the flag.

> >
> > >
> > > Set the appropriate fwnode flags when these device nodes are initiali=
zed
> > > by the clock framework and when OF_POPULATED flag is set/cleared. Thi=
s
> > > will allow fw_devlink to handle the dependencies correctly.
>
> How is this different from commit 3c9ea42802a1 ("clk: Mark fwnodes when
> their clock provider is added/removed")? Do you have some user of
> CLK_OF_DECLARE() that isn't registering an OF clk provider?

So it looks like drivers don't always register the same node used for
CLK_OF_DECLARE() as the clock provider. So, this is covering for the
case when that's not true.

-Saravana