Re: [PATCH 06/17] PM / OPP: Parse clock-latency and voltage-tolerance for v1 bindings
From: Stephen Boyd <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-12 01:29:07
On 12/22, Viresh Kumar wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -580,6 +581,21 @@ static struct device_opp *_add_device_opp_reg(struct device *dev, return NULL; } + /* + * Only required for backward compatibility with v1 bindings, but isn't + * harmful for other cases. And so we do it unconditionally. + */ + np = of_node_get(dev->of_node); + if (np) { + u32 val; + + if (!of_property_read_u32(np, "clock-latency", &val)) + dev_opp->clock_latency_ns_max = val; + of_property_read_u32(np, "voltage-tolerance", + &dev_opp->voltage_tolerance_v1);
Why do we conditionalize the assignment for clock latency but not for voltage tolerance?
+ of_node_put(np); + } + dev_opp->regulator = regulator_get_optional(dev, name); if (IS_ERR(dev_opp->regulator)) dev_info(dev, "%s: no regulator (%s) found: %ld\n", __func__,
-- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project