From: Thomas Abraham <ta.omasab@gmail.com> To: Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> Cc: "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pm@vger.kernel.org>, "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>, "Lukasz Majewski" <l.majewski@samsung.com>, "Kukjin Kim" <kgene.kim@samsung.com>, "Mike Turquette" <mturquette@linaro.org>, "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>, "Viresh Kumar" <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>, "Tomasz Figa" <t.figa@samsung.com>, "Chanwoo Choi" <cw00.choi@samsung.com>, "linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org" <linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 6/6] clk: samsung: remove unused clock aliases and update clock flags Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 00:19:36 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAJuA9aj9S_hSKHueBbr0kQk0fZLuAcoptmv1a-6tH1i5oFOJZA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <53DA8F1B.3010907@gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: > On 31.07.2014 20:41, Thomas Abraham wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 31.07.2014 20:24, Thomas Abraham wrote: >>>> Hi Tomasz, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 30.07.2014 10:07, Thomas Abraham wrote: >>>>>> With some of the Exynos SoCs switched over to use the generic CPUfreq drivers, >>>>>> the unused clock aliases can be removed. In addition to this, the individual >>>>>> clock blocks which are now encapsulated with the consolidate CPU clock type >>>>>> can now be marked with read-only flags. >>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>>> @@ -1500,6 +1499,7 @@ static void __init exynos4_clk_init(struct device_node *np, >>>>>> exynos4_soc == EXYNOS4210 ? "Exynos4210" : "Exynos4x12", >>>>>> _get_rate("sclk_apll"), _get_rate("sclk_mpll"), >>>>>> _get_rate("sclk_epll"), _get_rate("sclk_vpll"), >>>>>> + exynos4_soc == EXYNOS4210 ? _get_rate("armclk") : >>>>>> _get_rate("div_core2")); >>>>> >>>>> I believe "div_core2" should work fine here for all SoCs without the >>>>> need for this if. >>>> >>>> The following patch is a pre-requisite for this patch. >>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg351540.html >>>> >>>> The rate can be obtained from div_core2 as well but with the cpu clock >>>> now registered, the rate can be obtained from the cpu clock instance >>>> instead of the div_core2 divider. And when Exynos4412 also add cpu >>>> clock instance, the 'if' above will be removed. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c >>>>>> index e19e365..1d958f1 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c >>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>>> @@ -848,6 +851,6 @@ static void __init exynos5250_clk_init(struct device_node *np) >>>>>> samsung_clk_of_add_provider(np, ctx); >>>>>> >>>>>> pr_info("Exynos5250: clock setup completed, armclk=%ld\n", >>>>>> - _get_rate("div_arm2")); >>>>>> + _get_rate("armclk")); >>>>> >>>>> Similarly here, no need for this change. >>>> >>>> Same here. Instead of getting the rate from div_core2 divider block, >>>> the cpu clock instance is used to find the rate. I would prefer to use >>>> cpu clock here. Is there any reason to prefer div_core2 over the cpu >>>> clock instance? >>> >>> Well, the reason is simple: if you don't need to change something (i.e. >>> the change doesn't have any advantages), don't change it. >> >> The advantage with using cpu clock would be that get_rate can obtain >> the cached rate whereas when reading div_core2 rate, the clock tree >> will have to be traversed to determine the rate. >> > > This is just one time printk at initialization, so still no real > benefits. :) > > Well anyway, if you really don't want to undo this change, then I guess > I can live with it. Thanks Tomasz. Probably, I would just use cpu clock for now. > > Best regards, > Tomasz
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: ta.omasab@gmail.com (Thomas Abraham) To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH v9 6/6] clk: samsung: remove unused clock aliases and update clock flags Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 00:19:36 +0530 [thread overview] Message-ID: <CAJuA9aj9S_hSKHueBbr0kQk0fZLuAcoptmv1a-6tH1i5oFOJZA@mail.gmail.com> (raw) In-Reply-To: <53DA8F1B.3010907@gmail.com> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: > On 31.07.2014 20:41, Thomas Abraham wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 12:05 AM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 31.07.2014 20:24, Thomas Abraham wrote: >>>> Hi Tomasz, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2014 at 7:43 PM, Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> On 30.07.2014 10:07, Thomas Abraham wrote: >>>>>> With some of the Exynos SoCs switched over to use the generic CPUfreq drivers, >>>>>> the unused clock aliases can be removed. In addition to this, the individual >>>>>> clock blocks which are now encapsulated with the consolidate CPU clock type >>>>>> can now be marked with read-only flags. >>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>>> @@ -1500,6 +1499,7 @@ static void __init exynos4_clk_init(struct device_node *np, >>>>>> exynos4_soc == EXYNOS4210 ? "Exynos4210" : "Exynos4x12", >>>>>> _get_rate("sclk_apll"), _get_rate("sclk_mpll"), >>>>>> _get_rate("sclk_epll"), _get_rate("sclk_vpll"), >>>>>> + exynos4_soc == EXYNOS4210 ? _get_rate("armclk") : >>>>>> _get_rate("div_core2")); >>>>> >>>>> I believe "div_core2" should work fine here for all SoCs without the >>>>> need for this if. >>>> >>>> The following patch is a pre-requisite for this patch. >>>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/arm-kernel/msg351540.html >>>> >>>> The rate can be obtained from div_core2 as well but with the cpu clock >>>> now registered, the rate can be obtained from the cpu clock instance >>>> instead of the div_core2 divider. And when Exynos4412 also add cpu >>>> clock instance, the 'if' above will be removed. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c >>>>>> index e19e365..1d958f1 100644 >>>>>> --- a/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c >>>>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/samsung/clk-exynos5250.c >>>>> >>>>> [snip] >>>>> >>>>>> @@ -848,6 +851,6 @@ static void __init exynos5250_clk_init(struct device_node *np) >>>>>> samsung_clk_of_add_provider(np, ctx); >>>>>> >>>>>> pr_info("Exynos5250: clock setup completed, armclk=%ld\n", >>>>>> - _get_rate("div_arm2")); >>>>>> + _get_rate("armclk")); >>>>> >>>>> Similarly here, no need for this change. >>>> >>>> Same here. Instead of getting the rate from div_core2 divider block, >>>> the cpu clock instance is used to find the rate. I would prefer to use >>>> cpu clock here. Is there any reason to prefer div_core2 over the cpu >>>> clock instance? >>> >>> Well, the reason is simple: if you don't need to change something (i.e. >>> the change doesn't have any advantages), don't change it. >> >> The advantage with using cpu clock would be that get_rate can obtain >> the cached rate whereas when reading div_core2 rate, the clock tree >> will have to be traversed to determine the rate. >> > > This is just one time printk at initialization, so still no real > benefits. :) > > Well anyway, if you really don't want to undo this change, then I guess > I can live with it. Thanks Tomasz. Probably, I would just use cpu clock for now. > > Best regards, > Tomasz
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-31 18:49 UTC|newest] Thread overview: 121+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top 2014-07-30 8:07 [PATCH v9 0/6] cpufreq: use generic cpufreq drivers for exynos platforms Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` [PATCH v9 1/6] clk: samsung: add infrastructure to register cpu clocks Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-01 22:29 ` Mike Turquette 2014-09-01 22:29 ` Mike Turquette 2014-09-02 13:53 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-02 13:53 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` [PATCH v9 2/6] clk: samsung: add cpu clock configuration data and instantiate cpu clock Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-01 22:29 ` Mike Turquette 2014-09-01 22:29 ` Mike Turquette 2014-07-30 8:07 ` [PATCH v9 3/6] ARM: dts: Exynos: add CPU OPP and regulator supply property Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 11:28 ` Andreas Färber 2014-07-30 11:28 ` Andreas Färber 2014-07-31 2:55 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 2:55 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 0:37 ` Doug Anderson 2014-07-31 0:37 ` Doug Anderson 2014-07-31 3:21 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 3:21 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 3:53 ` Doug Anderson 2014-07-31 3:53 ` Doug Anderson 2014-07-31 4:06 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 4:06 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 4:08 ` Doug Anderson 2014-07-31 4:08 ` Doug Anderson 2014-07-31 4:18 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 4:18 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-02 3:49 ` Javier Martinez Canillas 2014-08-02 3:49 ` Javier Martinez Canillas 2014-08-04 3:00 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-04 3:00 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` [PATCH v9 4/6] ARM: Exynos: switch to using generic cpufreq driver for Exynos4210/5250/5420 Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:32 ` Kukjin Kim 2014-07-31 18:32 ` Kukjin Kim 2014-07-31 18:40 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:40 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:54 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:54 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 19:25 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 19:25 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 19:30 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 19:30 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-08-04 3:24 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-04 3:24 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-22 23:54 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-22 23:54 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-23 0:02 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-08-23 0:02 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-08-25 6:53 ` Lukasz Majewski 2014-08-25 6:53 ` Lukasz Majewski 2014-08-25 12:15 ` Chander Kashyap 2014-08-25 12:15 ` Chander Kashyap 2014-08-25 15:32 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-25 15:32 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-25 15:56 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-08-25 15:56 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-08-26 4:54 ` Viresh Kumar 2014-08-26 4:54 ` Viresh Kumar 2014-08-26 5:25 ` Chander Kashyap 2014-08-26 5:25 ` Chander Kashyap 2014-08-26 15:15 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-26 15:15 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-26 22:25 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-26 22:25 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-29 12:52 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-29 12:52 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-29 15:03 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-08-29 15:03 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-09-01 8:47 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-01 8:47 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-02 19:32 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-09-02 19:32 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-09-03 4:26 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-03 4:26 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-03 13:18 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-03 13:18 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-03 23:15 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-09-03 23:15 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-09-04 10:22 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-04 13:30 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-09-04 13:30 ` Kevin Hilman 2014-09-05 13:41 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-05 13:41 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-25 8:11 ` Sjoerd Simons 2014-08-25 8:11 ` Sjoerd Simons 2014-07-30 8:07 ` [PATCH v9 5/6] cpufreq: exynos: remove exynos4210/5250 specific cpufreq driver support Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` [PATCH v9 6/6] clk: samsung: remove unused clock aliases and update clock flags Thomas Abraham 2014-07-30 8:07 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 14:13 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 14:13 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:24 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:24 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:35 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:35 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:41 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:41 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:46 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:46 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:49 ` Thomas Abraham [this message] 2014-07-31 18:49 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-09-01 22:31 ` Mike Turquette 2014-09-01 22:31 ` Mike Turquette 2014-07-31 6:20 ` [PATCH v9 0/6] cpufreq: use generic cpufreq drivers for exynos platforms Chander M. Kashyap 2014-07-31 6:20 ` Chander M. Kashyap 2014-07-31 10:59 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 10:59 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 12:24 ` Chander M. Kashyap 2014-07-31 12:24 ` Chander M. Kashyap 2014-07-31 14:15 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 14:15 ` Tomasz Figa 2014-07-31 18:25 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:25 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:34 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-07-31 18:34 ` Thomas Abraham 2014-08-01 9:42 ` Viresh Kumar 2014-08-01 9:42 ` Viresh Kumar
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=CAJuA9aj9S_hSKHueBbr0kQk0fZLuAcoptmv1a-6tH1i5oFOJZA@mail.gmail.com \ --to=ta.omasab@gmail.com \ --cc=cw00.choi@samsung.com \ --cc=heiko@sntech.de \ --cc=kgene.kim@samsung.com \ --cc=l.majewski@samsung.com \ --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \ --cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org \ --cc=mturquette@linaro.org \ --cc=t.figa@samsung.com \ --cc=tomasz.figa@gmail.com \ --cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \ /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: linkBe sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.