From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B8F4C432BE for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 12:38:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F9466109E for ; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 12:38:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241914AbhHZMiv (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 08:38:51 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:56544 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S241261AbhHZMiu (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Aug 2021 08:38:50 -0400 Received: by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 45AB7610C8; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 12:38:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1629981483; bh=oYW580H2r0Vk0cbC8cBai0zFZz3y1uoZPGESg1qexXU=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:From; b=f0HZaSS4gtmS+SL34ztpsapPiRtEUGKYJWcRETMfuNr3cIG1p7DW3QaXCLGId7yHd VCko2KGBxLk35kGtU4GYr76WUOBaH9xAF13YuP0YP/07m2YdiPncHssgftkP8jZVWX aQF637zpXaqpRuqfM3+RR6hfDlAX2Ykqy+6kK4clPbOIiwxXKM0LDHj6LoDlDjqPAH TjeTHVnwhhMYjkB5lNWiHnbaJRSb+ljSAhQlLKsnxwmMwUX9YmZwrtkWUEY1gctJEv QLbEx8Sp+qk/SCNRdoPkZKILlg4XNC7H6tdp0pzfLdCmQExm6NWRzYLk7utjzAaFg+ CoSIWmfhVSC4g== Received: by mail-ej1-f44.google.com with SMTP id ia27so5919378ejc.10; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 05:38:03 -0700 (PDT) X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532WtF1M7Kj4MkwX6t+QaoGKTUjQLolB6Q2k/rtQYV33BW+ds1Hl jbicPnpbymbCZ2BQDaDIHvc5g/rUQhfrRKa3/A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzPmphkjNnES72zf5E0Tys8QPVr6+4jD+sFXoKYqUfYojDMBajfSo+1uGlz0Bet8TS24XzxfR5NSH1HPcQKtQI= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:25db:: with SMTP id n27mr3993295ejb.108.1629981481805; Thu, 26 Aug 2021 05:38:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210825212549.GA3609092@bjorn-Precision-5520> <1795efc94a7b87fb4d9f769e03ce21c6@codeaurora.org> In-Reply-To: <1795efc94a7b87fb4d9f769e03ce21c6@codeaurora.org> From: Rob Herring Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 07:37:48 -0500 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] PCI: qcom: Switch pcie_1_pipe_clk_src after PHY init in SC7280 To: Prasad Malisetty Cc: Bjorn Helgaas , Stephen Boyd , agross@kernel.org, bhelgaas@google.com, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, svarbanov@mm-sol.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, dianders@chromium.org, mka@chromium.org, vbadigan@codeaurora.org, sallenki@codeaurora.org, manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 2:22 AM Prasad Malisetty wrote: > > On 2021-08-26 02:55, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > > [+cc linux-pci; patches to drivers/pci/ should always be cc'd there] > > > > On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 07:30:09PM +0000, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> Quoting Prasad Malisetty (2021-08-24 01:10:48) > >> > On 2021-08-17 22:56, Prasad Malisetty wrote: > >> > > On 2021-08-10 09:38, Prasad Malisetty wrote: > >> > >> On the SC7280, By default the clock source for pcie_1_pipe is > >> > >> TCXO for gdsc enable. But after the PHY is initialized, the clock > >> > >> source must be switched to gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk from TCXO. > >> > >> > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Prasad Malisetty > >> > >> --- > >> > >> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > >> > >> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) > >> > >> > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c > >> > >> b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c > >> > >> index 8a7a300..39e3b21 100644 > >> > >> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c > >> > >> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c > >> > >> @@ -166,6 +166,8 @@ struct qcom_pcie_resources_2_7_0 { > >> > >> struct regulator_bulk_data supplies[2]; > >> > >> struct reset_control *pci_reset; > >> > >> struct clk *pipe_clk; > >> > >> + struct clk *gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src; > >> > >> + struct clk *phy_pipe_clk; > >> > >> }; > >> > >> > >> > >> union qcom_pcie_resources { > >> > >> @@ -1167,6 +1169,16 @@ static int qcom_pcie_get_resources_2_7_0(struct > >> > >> qcom_pcie *pcie) > >> > >> if (ret < 0) > >> > >> return ret; > >> > >> > >> > >> + if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "qcom,pcie-sc7280")) { > >> > >> + res->gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src = devm_clk_get(dev, "pipe_mux"); > >> > >> + if (IS_ERR(res->gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src)) > >> > >> + return PTR_ERR(res->gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src); > >> > >> + > >> > >> + res->phy_pipe_clk = devm_clk_get(dev, "phy_pipe"); > >> > >> + if (IS_ERR(res->phy_pipe_clk)) > >> > >> + return PTR_ERR(res->phy_pipe_clk); > >> > >> + } > >> > > > >> > > I would like to check is there any other better approach instead of > >> > > compatible method here as well or is it fine to use compatible method. > >> > >> I'd prefer the compatible method. If nobody is responding then it's > >> best > >> to just resend the patches with the approach you prefer instead of > >> waiting for someone to respond to a review comment. > > > > I'm missing some context here, so I'm not exactly sure what your > > question is, Prasad, but IMO drivers generally should not need to use > > of_device_is_compatible() if they've already called > > of_device_get_match_data() (as qcom_pcie_probe() has). > > > > of_device_is_compatible() does basically the same work of looking for > > a match in qcom_pcie_match[] that of_device_get_match_data() does, so > > it seems pointless to repeat it. +1 > > I am a little confused because while [1] adds "qcom,pcie-sc7280" to > > qcom,pcie.txt, I don't see a patch that adds it to qcom_pcie_match[]. Either that's missing or there's a fallback to 8250 that's not documented. > > > > Bjorn > > > Hi Bjorn, > > I agree on your point, but the main reason is to use compatible in > get_resources_2_7_0 is same hardware version. For SM8250 & SC7280 > platforms, the hw version is same. Since we can't have a separate ops > for SC7280, we are using compatible method in get_resources_2_7_0 to > differentiate SM8250 and SC7280. Then fix the match data to be not just ops, but ops and the flag you need here. Rob