clk: max77686: Clock provider implementation fixes

This series intends to improve clock provider impementation of max77686 PMIC driver. First two patches are simple fixes of current implementation to allow correct control of provided clocks. Further patches refactor the driver to make the code cleaner and prepare for further patches. Then last two patches add registration of OF clock provider and adjust device tree nodes of boards containing max77686 chip to contain properties required by clock provider.

Tested on Exynos4412-based Trats2 board, with additional patches adding driver being a consumer of one of max77686 clocks.

Changes since v1:
- rebased on top of current clk-next (no functional changes)

Tomasz Figa (8):
clk: max77686: Correct callback used for checking clock status
clk: max77686: Provide .recalc_rate() operation
clk: max77686: Refactor successful exit of probe function
clk: max77686: Make max77686_clk_register() return struct clk *
clk: max77686: Fix clean-up in error and remove paths
clk: max77686: Refactor driver data handling
clk: max77686: Register OF clock provider
ARM: dts: Add clock provider specific properties to max77686 node

 .../devicetree/bindings/clock/maxim,max77686.txt   | 38 +++++++++
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max77686.txt |  3 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/cros5250-common.dtsi             |  1 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroidx.dts           |  1 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-trats2.dts            |  1 +
 drivers/clk/clk-max77686.c                         | 97 +++++++++++++---------
 6 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/maxim,max77686.txt

This series intends to improve clock provider impementation of max77686 PMIC driver. First two patches are simple fixes of current implementation to allow correct control of provided clocks. Further patches refactor the driver to make the code cleaner and prepare for further patches. Then last two patches add registration of OF clock provider and adjust device tree nodes of boards containing max77686 chip to contain properties required by clock provider.

Tested on Exynos4412-based Trats2 board, with additional patches adding driver being a consumer of one of max77686 clocks.

Changes since v1:
- rebased on top of current clk-next (no functional changes)

Tomasz Figa (8):
clk: max77686: Correct callback used for checking clock status
clk: max77686: Provide .recalc_rate() operation
clk: max77686: Refactor successful exit of probe function
clk: max77686: Make max77686_clk_register() return struct clk *
clk: max77686: Fix clean-up in error and remove paths
clk: max77686: Refactor driver data handling
clk: max77686: Register OF clock provider
ARM: dts: Add clock provider specific properties to max77686 node

 .../devicetree/bindings/clock/maxim,max77686.txt   | 38 +++++++++
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/mfd/max77686.txt |  3 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/cros5250-common.dtsi             |  1 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-odroidx.dts           |  1 +
 arch/arm/boot/dts/exynos4412-trats2.dts            |  1 +
 drivers/clk/clk-max77686.c                         | 97 +++++++++++++---------
 6 files changed, 104 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/maxim,max77686.txt

Signature · 1 line

1.8.4.3

Quoting Tomasz Figa (2013-12-12 08:07:13)

Quoted 7 lines

This series intends to improve clock provider impementation of max77686 PMIC driver. First two patches are simple fixes of current implementation to allow correct control of provided clocks. Further patches refactor the driver to make the code cleaner and prepare for further patches. Then last two patches add registration of OF clock provider and adjust device tree nodes of boards containing max77686 chip to contain properties required by clock provider.

Acked-by Mike Turquette <[email protected]>

Quoted 8 lines

Quoted 7 lines

This series intends to improve clock provider impementation of max77686 PMIC driver. First two patches are simple fixes of current implementation to allow correct control of provided clocks. Further patches refactor the driver to make the code cleaner and prepare for further patches. Then last two patches add registration of OF clock provider and adjust device tree nodes of boards containing max77686 chip to contain properties required by clock provider.

Quoted 1 line

Acked-by Mike Turquette <[email protected]>

Hmm... Shouldn't this series go through the clk tree directly? If not, who should be taking it?

Quoted 9 lines

Quoting Tomasz Figa (2013-12-12 08:07:13)

Quoted 7 lines

This series intends to improve clock provider impementation of max77686 PMIC driver. First two patches are simple fixes of current implementation to allow correct control of provided clocks. Further patches refactor the driver to make the code cleaner and prepare for further patches. Then last two patches add registration of OF clock provider and adjust device tree nodes of boards containing max77686 chip to contain properties required by clock provider.

Quoted 1 line

Acked-by Mike Turquette <[email protected]>

Hmm... Shouldn't this series go through the clk tree directly? If not, who should be taking it?

Best regards,
Tomasz

Quoting Tomasz Figa (2014-01-02 07:22:12)

Quoted 10 lines · On Tuesday 31 of December 2013 11:42:15 Mike Turquette wrote:

Quoted 9 lines

Quoting Tomasz Figa (2013-12-12 08:07:13)

Quoted 7 lines

This series intends to improve clock provider impementation of max77686 PMIC driver. First two patches are simple fixes of current implementation to allow correct control of provided clocks. Further patches refactor the driver to make the code cleaner and prepare for further patches. Then last two patches add registration of OF clock provider and adjust device tree nodes of boards containing max77686 chip to contain properties required by clock provider.

Quoted 4 lines

Quoted 1 line

Acked-by Mike Turquette <[email protected]>

Hmm... Shouldn't this series go through the clk tree directly? If not, who should be taking it?

Yes it should, but I guessed it would come in a pull request. Maybe Ack is the wrong thing? I can just say "looks good to me me" or something else.

Quoted 16 lines

Quoting Tomasz Figa (2014-01-02 07:22:12)

Quoted 14 lines · On Tuesday 31 of December 2013 11:42:15 Mike Turquette wrote:

Quoted 10 lines

Quoting Tomasz Figa (2013-12-12 08:07:13)

Quoted 7 lines

This series intends to improve clock provider impementation of max77686 PMIC driver. First two patches are simple fixes of current implementation to allow correct control of provided clocks. Further patches refactor the driver to make the code cleaner and prepare for further patches. Then last two patches add registration of OF clock provider and adjust device tree nodes of boards containing max77686 chip to contain properties required by clock provider.

Acked-by Mike Turquette <[email protected]>

Hmm... Shouldn't this series go through the clk tree directly? If not, who should be taking it?

Quoted 3 lines

Yes it should, but I guessed it would come in a pull request. Maybe Ack is the wrong thing? I can just say "looks good to me me" or something else.

Nah, I think Ack is completely right, but still this series is quite standalone, e.g. it does not really belong to samsung-clk nor any other clock subtree, so I thought you would be applying them directly.

I believe Lee has already applied this one, but in future, to avoid such confusion, if it's more convenient for you, I can send you any clock series as pull requests.

Best regards,
Tomasz

I believe Lee has already applied this one, but in future, to avoid such confusion, if it's more convenient for you, I can send you any clock series as pull requests.

Quoted 3 lines

I believe Lee has already applied this one, but in future, to avoid such confusion, if it's more convenient for you, I can send you any clock series as pull requests.

Me? I haven't applied any clk patches.

Signature · 5 lines

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

Quoting Lee Jones (2014-01-08 09:15:44)

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

I believe Lee has already applied this one, but in future, to avoid such confusion, if it's more convenient for you, I can send you any clock series as pull requests.

Me? I haven't applied any clk patches.

I have taken patches 1-7 into clk-next just now.

I can take patch #8 as
well but it would probably be better to send it through arm-soc?

Quoted 8 lines

Quoting Lee Jones (2014-01-08 09:15:44)

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

I believe Lee has already applied this one, but in future, to avoid such confusion, if it's more convenient for you, I can send you any clock series as pull requests.

Me? I haven't applied any clk patches.

I have taken patches 1-7 into clk-next just now.

Thanks.

Quoted 2 lines

I can take patch #8 as
well but it would probably be better to send it through arm-soc?

Hmm, patch 8 is trivial enough to not cause any merge conflicts, but since it's unlikely that any users depending on introduced changes will show up for 3.14 it shouldn't really matter which tree it goes through...

Best regards,
Tomasz

Quoting Tomasz Figa (2014-01-08 10:04:57)

Quoted 15 lines · On Wednesday 08 of January 2014 09:59:39 Mike Turquette wrote:

Quoted 8 lines

Quoting Lee Jones (2014-01-08 09:15:44)

Quoted 5 lines

Quoted 3 lines

I believe Lee has already applied this one, but in future, to avoid such confusion, if it's more convenient for you, I can send you any clock series as pull requests.

Me? I haven't applied any clk patches.

I have taken patches 1-7 into clk-next just now.

Thanks.

Quoted 2 lines

I can take patch #8 as
well but it would probably be better to send it through arm-soc?

Quoted 3 lines

Hmm, patch 8 is trivial enough to not cause any merge conflicts, but since it's unlikely that any users depending on introduced changes will show up for 3.14 it shouldn't really matter which tree it goes through...

In the absence of any strong opinion on the topic I have taken patch #8 into clk-next for 3.14.