From: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>
To: "J, KEERTHY" <j-keerthy@ti.com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@openphoenux.org>, <paul@pwsan.com>,
<sboyd@kernel.org>, <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <t-kristo@ti.com>,
<bcousson@baylibre.com>, <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Letux-kernel] [PATCH v3 3/3] arm: omap_hwmod disable ick autoidling when a hwmod requires that
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 08:12:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190119081211.73844b6a@aktux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c2c283c5-d1f7-8b65-a19b-0c4af80b722a@ti.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2085 bytes --]
On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 12:09:48 +0530
"J, KEERTHY" <j-keerthy@ti.com> wrote:
> On 1/19/2019 1:18 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> [190118 19:42]:
> >> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:38:47 +0100
> >> Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:36:30 -0800
> >>> Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>>> til the next workaround.
> >>>>
> >>>>> That flags also causes the iclk being enabled/disabled
> >>>>> manually.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes but SWSUP_IDLE for the interface clock to me currently
> >>>> just means:
> >>>>
> >>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock"
> >>>>
> >>> well, if we want to manually disable it and not automatically,
> >>> we have to disable autoidle or it will be automatically disabled.
> >>>
> >>> Disabling it manually when it is already auto-disabled (by autoidle) is
> >>> just practically a no-op towards the clock.
> >>>
> >>>> and with your changes it becomes:
> >>>>
> >>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock and block
> >>>> autoidle while in use".
> >>>>
> >>>> So aren't we now changing the way things behave in general
> >>>> for SWSUP_IDLE?
> >>>>
> >>> Yes, we are, so proper testing is needed. But If I read those comments
> >>> it was always intended this way but not fully implemented because it
> >>> appeared to be more work like needing a usecounter (which my patchset
> >>> also adds) for that autoidle flag.
> >>>
> >> and there are quite few hwmods marked by this flag.
> >> And then there are those clocks marked by this flags (on am33xx) which
> >> do not have that autoidle feature at all, so the risk is not too high.
> >
> > Keerthy, can you please test this series on top of the
> > related clock patches with your am335x PM test cases?
>
> Can you point me to the clock series that needs to be tested
> along with this?
>
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-clk/list/?series=66691
Regards,
Andreas
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-19 7:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-01-16 22:04 [PATCH v3 0/3] mach-omap2: handle autoidle denial Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-16 22:04 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] clk: ti: add a usecount for autoidle Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-16 22:04 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] clk: ti: check clock type before doing autoidle ops Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-16 22:04 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] arm: omap_hwmod disable ick autoidling when a hwmod requires that Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-18 15:48 ` Tony Lindgren
2019-01-18 17:18 ` Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-18 18:36 ` Tony Lindgren
2019-01-18 19:38 ` Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-18 19:42 ` [Letux-kernel] " Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-18 19:48 ` Tony Lindgren
2019-01-19 6:39 ` J, KEERTHY
2019-01-19 7:12 ` Andreas Kemnade [this message]
2019-01-19 7:58 ` J, KEERTHY
2019-01-22 6:26 ` Keerthy
2019-01-18 19:45 ` Tony Lindgren
2019-01-21 7:12 ` Tero Kristo
2019-01-21 17:07 ` Tony Lindgren
2019-01-21 17:53 ` Andreas Kemnade
2019-01-21 19:56 ` Tony Lindgren
2019-01-21 19:58 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] mach-omap2: handle autoidle denial Tony Lindgren
2019-02-09 18:53 ` Andreas Kemnade
2019-02-15 19:19 ` Tero Kristo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190119081211.73844b6a@aktux \
--to=andreas@kemnade.info \
--cc=bcousson@baylibre.com \
--cc=j-keerthy@ti.com \
--cc=letux-kernel@openphoenux.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=paul@pwsan.com \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=t-kristo@ti.com \
--cc=tony@atomide.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).