From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from metis.ext.pengutronix.de ([2001:6f8:1178:4:290:27ff:fe1d:cc33]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1UF71a-00059D-W1 for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 18:00:40 +0000 Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 19:00:36 +0100 From: Sascha Hauer Message-ID: <20130311180036.GJ1906@pengutronix.de> References: <1362994003-22653-1-git-send-email-shc_work@mail.ru> <20130311110158.GE11170@game.jcrosoft.org> <20130311111039.GI1906@pengutronix.de> <1363018925.795429615@f314.mail.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1363018925.795429615@f314.mail.ru> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/13] ARM: clps711x: Add clocksource driver To: Alexander Shiyan Cc: barebox@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 08:22:05PM +0400, Alexander Shiyan wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 12:01:58PM +0100, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote: > > > > +static int clps711x_cs_probe(struct device_d *dev) > > > > +{ > > > > + u32 rate; > > > > + struct clk *timer_clk; > > > > + > > > > + timer_clk = clk_get(dev, NULL); > > > > + if (IS_ERR(timer_clk)) > > > > + return PTR_ERR(timer_clk); > > > > + > > > > + rate = clk_get_rate(timer_clk); > > > > + clps711x_timer_base = dev_request_mem_region(dev, 0); > > > > + if (!clps711x_timer_base) { > > > > + clk_put(timer_clk); > > > > + return -ENOENT; > > > > + } > > > this deserve a nice crash > > > > No, it doesn't. First of all we are very early here, so we might not even > > see the crash. Then, with devicetree probing we may often end up with > > the same devices registered from the devicetree and from the > > platform/soc. While this should find a way to avoid duplicate device > > registration, it is not nice having barebox crash in this case. > > So what is the solution you propose in this case? For the device duplication I don't have a solution yet. Basically I wanted to say that your patch looks good the way you did it. Sascha -- Pengutronix e.K. | | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 | _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox