Hi Gilad,

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef [off-list ref] wrote:

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 10:48 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 3:43 PM, Gilad Ben-Yossef [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 1:16 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
[off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

Indeed. From a quick glance, it looks like drivers/crypto/ccree/cc_driver.c
does not distinguish between the absence of the clock property, and an
actual error in getting the clock, and never considers any error a failure
(incl. -PROBE_DEFER).

As of_clk_get() returns -ENOENT for both a missing clock property and a
missing clock, you should use (devm_)clk_get() instead, and distinguish
between NULL (no clock property) and IS_ERR() (actual failure -> abort).

I was trying to do as you suggested but I didn't quite get what is the
dev_id (2nd) parameter to devm_clk_get parameter is supposed to be.

It's the (optional) name of the clock, helpful in case there is more than one.
In your case, NULL is fine.

I have assumed as much and tried it, it did not work and so I assumed
I am missing something and asked you.
It turns out I was missing the fact I was using the wrong device tree
file... :-(

So thanks, it works now :-)

Glad to hear that!

Having said that, while using devm)clk_get() is a better approach, it
does not seems to distinguish
between no "clocks" and a failure to clock information - it returns
ENOENT in both cases as well.

Oh right, I guess I'm too used to not even getting that far due to the PM
Domain code failing to obtain the clock...

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds