From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Walleij Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: qcom: Elaborate on "active" clocks in the RPM clock bindings Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:33:11 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20170322081842.20495-1-linus.walleij@linaro.org> <20170329005943.xqs6ouqbqwdzaayf@rob-hp-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20170329005943.xqs6ouqbqwdzaayf@rob-hp-laptop> Sender: devicetree-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Rob Herring Cc: Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , linux-clk , "linux-arm-msm-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:59 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 09:18:42AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: >> The concept of "active" clocks is just explained in a bried comment in the >> device driver, let's explain it a bit more in the device tree bindings >> so everyone understands this. >> >> Cc: devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org >> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt | 8 ++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt >> index d470a0187035..cf80a00b7ff2 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt >> @@ -18,6 +18,14 @@ Required properties : >> >> - #clock-cells : shall contain 1 >> >> +The clock enumerators are defined in >> +and come in pairs: FOO_CLK followed by FOO_A_CLK. The latter clock >> +is an "active" clock, which means that the consumer only care that the >> +clock is available when the system is active, i.e. not suspended. If >> +it is important that the clock keeps running during system suspend, >> +you need to specify the non-active clock, the one not containing >> +*_A_* in the enumerator name. >> + > > Sounds like abuse as the clock id is encoding policy into it. The number > of clocks should be the number of inputs to a block. I wouldn't be > opposed to some flags for clocks, but that should be a separate cell. I'm sorry about that, but I'm just documenting what is already a fact and was previously just implicit in the name. I first had no idea what this *_A_* infix notation was about so after some reading I found a comment in the driver saying this. I guess Stephen can confirm and/or elaborate on this. Keeping them around is I guess the lesser evil (as compard to pulling up the deployed bindings with the roots) at this point. Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20170329005943.xqs6ouqbqwdzaayf@rob-hp-laptop> References: <20170322081842.20495-1-linus.walleij@linaro.org> <20170329005943.xqs6ouqbqwdzaayf@rob-hp-laptop> From: Linus Walleij Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2017 03:33:11 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: qcom: Elaborate on "active" clocks in the RPM clock bindings To: Rob Herring Cc: Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , linux-clk , "linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 List-ID: On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:59 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Mar 22, 2017 at 09:18:42AM +0100, Linus Walleij wrote: >> The concept of "active" clocks is just explained in a bried comment in the >> device driver, let's explain it a bit more in the device tree bindings >> so everyone understands this. >> >> Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij >> --- >> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt | 8 ++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt >> index d470a0187035..cf80a00b7ff2 100644 >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.txt >> @@ -18,6 +18,14 @@ Required properties : >> >> - #clock-cells : shall contain 1 >> >> +The clock enumerators are defined in >> +and come in pairs: FOO_CLK followed by FOO_A_CLK. The latter clock >> +is an "active" clock, which means that the consumer only care that the >> +clock is available when the system is active, i.e. not suspended. If >> +it is important that the clock keeps running during system suspend, >> +you need to specify the non-active clock, the one not containing >> +*_A_* in the enumerator name. >> + > > Sounds like abuse as the clock id is encoding policy into it. The number > of clocks should be the number of inputs to a block. I wouldn't be > opposed to some flags for clocks, but that should be a separate cell. I'm sorry about that, but I'm just documenting what is already a fact and was previously just implicit in the name. I first had no idea what this *_A_* infix notation was about so after some reading I found a comment in the driver saying this. I guess Stephen can confirm and/or elaborate on this. Keeping them around is I guess the lesser evil (as compard to pulling up the deployed bindings with the roots) at this point. Yours, Linus Walleij