Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-208343-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Message-ID: <573a01e0-0954-4238-b5d6-3bb2b30ecace@ti.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 09:11:54 -0500
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH] counter: ti-eqep: enable clock at probe
To: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>,
        William Breathitt Gray
	<wbg@kernel.org>
CC: <linux-iio@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20240609-ti-eqep-enable-clock-v1-1-1e9e7626467e@baylibre.com>
 <c08d2d51-e2e1-4b68-a4fb-ebf3a919c1b8@ti.com>
 <e1c7bc9f-3ecd-446f-a6a2-f97d6a8aa78d@baylibre.com>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com>
In-Reply-To: <e1c7bc9f-3ecd-446f-a6a2-f97d6a8aa78d@baylibre.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi David,

On 6/10/24 8:53 AM, David Lechner wrote:
> On 6/10/24 8:44 AM, Judith Mendez wrote:
>> Hi David,
>>
>> On 6/9/24 3:27 PM, David Lechner wrote:
>>> The TI eQEP clock is both a functional and interface clock. Since it is
>>> required for the device to function, we should be enabling it at probe.
>>>
>>> Up to now, we've just been lucky that the clock was enabled by something
>>> else on the system already.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: David Lechner <dlechner@baylibre.com>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/counter/ti-eqep.c | 6 ++++++
>>>    1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/counter/ti-eqep.c b/drivers/counter/ti-eqep.c
>>> index 072b11fd6b32..825ae22c3ebc 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/counter/ti-eqep.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/counter/ti-eqep.c
>>> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>>>     */
>>>      #include <linux/bitops.h>
>>> +#include <linux/clk.h>
>>>    #include <linux/counter.h>
>>>    #include <linux/kernel.h>
>>>    #include <linux/mod_devicetable.h>
>>> @@ -376,6 +377,7 @@ static int ti_eqep_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>        struct counter_device *counter;
>>>        struct ti_eqep_cnt *priv;
>>>        void __iomem *base;
>>> +    struct clk *clk;
>>>        int err;
>>>          counter = devm_counter_alloc(dev, sizeof(*priv));
>>> @@ -415,6 +417,10 @@ static int ti_eqep_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>>        pm_runtime_enable(dev);
>>>        pm_runtime_get_sync(dev);
>>>    +    clk = devm_clk_get_enabled(dev, NULL);
>>> +    if (IS_ERR(clk))
>>
>> I think it would be nice to have print here in case the we fail to get
>> the clock.
> 
> Do you mean that we should call devm_clk_get() and clk_prepare_enable()
> separately so that we get two different error messages?
> 
> The dev_err_probe() below will already print a message on any error
> (other that EPROBE_DEFER).

Apologies, I misread. The way you have it is good, thanks.

Reviewed-by: Judith Mendez <jm@ti.com>

> 
>>
>> ~ Judith
>>
>>> +        return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(clk), "failed to enable clock\n");
>>> +
>>>        err = counter_add(counter);
>>>        if (err < 0) {
>>>            pm_runtime_put_sync(dev);
>>>
>>> ---
>>> base-commit: bb3f1c5fc434b0b177449f7f73ea9b112b397dd1
>>> change-id: 20240609-ti-eqep-enable-clock-91697095ca81
>>
>