From: Pintu Agarwal <pintu.ping@gmail.com>
To: Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>,
s.hauer@pengutronix.de, p.zabel@pengutronix.de
Cc: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/FREESCALE IMX / MXC ARM ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Kernelnewbies <kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org>
Subject: Re: [IMX] [DRM]: help in analyzing clock_summary rate difference
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 20:59:54 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOuPNLjdSh+pw196PAcBO9B-OgRb=f7sKcMFyGJPW3PNFwEyZA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOuPNLg5A1bB-Tmndm4PvsJ40tj0yn-bJ2mfifEpjAF-t84wiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi,
I need one general help in analyzing difference in clock_summary rate
before and after the system resume.
I am using custom IMX7 board with 4.9 Kernel.
With this I am trying to support some functionality during suspend/resume.
I am trying to analyze clk_summary from:
# cat /sys/kernel/debug/clk/clk_summary
I observed that there are difference in "clock rate" after system
resume and module install. However the enable/prepare count remains
the same.
Since I am not much familiar with clock framework, I am looking for
some help to analyze this issue. It's an internal issue.
May be someone which is familiar with clock analysis or fixed the
similar issue earlier can give me some guidance.
What does the difference in clock rate indicates?
What analysis can be done to narrow down the root cause?
Any example of reference could be helpful to understand.
Thank You!
Regards,
Pintu
_______________________________________________
Kernelnewbies mailing list
Kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org
https://lists.kernelnewbies.org/mailman/listinfo/kernelnewbies
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-11 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-17 13:49 [IMX] [DRM]: suspend/resume support Pintu Agarwal
2019-06-18 7:01 ` Oliver Neukum
2019-06-18 14:02 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-06-18 14:45 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-06-18 15:09 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-06-19 13:33 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-06-19 13:44 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-06-19 15:04 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-06-19 15:11 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-06-19 15:29 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-06-21 15:12 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-06-21 15:40 ` Fabio Estevam
2019-06-22 8:13 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-07-01 14:25 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-07-11 15:29 ` Pintu Agarwal [this message]
2019-06-19 15:04 ` Greg KH
2019-06-19 15:17 ` Pintu Agarwal
2019-06-19 16:26 ` Valdis Klētnieks
2019-06-21 15:04 ` Pintu Agarwal
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='CAOuPNLjdSh+pw196PAcBO9B-OgRb=f7sKcMFyGJPW3PNFwEyZA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=pintu.ping@gmail.com \
--cc=festevam@gmail.com \
--cc=kernelnewbies@kernelnewbies.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=p.zabel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
/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).