From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org>
To: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>,
Jonathan Marek <jonathan@marek.ca>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org>,
"open list:DRM DRIVER FOR MSM ADRENO GPU"
<linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS"
<devicetree@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:COMMON CLK FRAMEWORK" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
"Bryan O'Donoghue" <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/6] clk: qcom: use power-domain for sm8250's clock controllers
Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2021 11:50:28 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA8EJpokEq5JB63wYCpjssKt8neEpeW71pD9nUTjZ0Z_o6U=0A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPDyKFrv9HM9y1zgPj6x2K84cPuYXOqaQYqtvKZ51itPtt3ghw@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, 7 Sept 2021 at 17:34, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 at 17:54, Dmitry Baryshkov
> <dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 29 Aug 2021 at 06:51, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2021-08-26 14:56:23)
> > > > On 26/08/2021 21:31, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > > Quoting Dmitry Baryshkov (2021-07-27 13:19:56)
> > > > >> On SM8250 both the display and video clock controllers are powered up by
> > > > >> the MMCX power domain. Handle this by linking clock controllers to the
> > > > >> proper power domain, and using runtime power management to enable and
> > > > >> disable the MMCX power domain.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Dependencies:
> > > > >> - https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20210703005416.2668319-1-bjorn.andersson@linaro.org/
> > > > >> (pending)
> > > > >
> > > > > Does this patch series need to go through the qcom tree? Presumably the
> > > > > dependency is going through qcom -> arm-soc
> > > >
> > > > It looks like Bjorn did not apply his patches in the for-5.15 series, so
> > > > we'd have to wait anyway. Probably I should rebase these patches instead
> > > > on Rajendra's required-opps patch (which is going in this window).
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ok. Thanks. I'll drop it from my queue for now.
> >
> > Just for the reference. I've sent v7 of this patchset. After thinking
> > more about power domains relationship, I think we have a hole in the
> > abstraction here. Currently subdomains cause power domains to be
> > powered up, but do not dictate the performance level the parent domain
> > should be working in.
>
> That's not entirely true. In genpd_add_subdomain() we verify that if
> the child is powered on, the parent must already be powered on,
> otherwise we treat this a bad setup and return an error code.
>
> What seems to be missing though, is that if there is a performance
> state applied for the child domain, that should be propagated to the
> parent domain too. Right?
>
> > While this does not look like an issue for the
> > gdsc (and thus it can be easily solved by the Bjorn's patches, which
> > enforce rpmhpd to be powered on to 'at least lowest possible'
> > performance state, this might be not the case for the future links. I
> > think at some point the pd_add_subdomain() interface should be
> > extended with the ability to specify minimum required performance
> > state when the link becomes on.
>
> I guess that minimum performance state could be considered as a
> "required-opp" in the DT node for the power-domain provider, no?
Yes, up to some point. But this enforces a particular driver code
(that I've had to change from v6 to v7).
In v6 the gdsc's power_on code would pm_runtime_get() the provider
device, power on the domain and the pm_runtime_put() the provider
device. Thus the gdsc genpd would be powered on (keeping parent
domains in the on state), but the provider device itself would be
runtime-suspended (neat idea by Bjorn). However this relied on changes
in rpmhpd behaviour (which still did not make it to linux-next).
In v7 we have to keep the provider device in resumed state while the
gdsc genpd is powered on (to keep the required-opps vote in place).
I suppose that 'child requires minimum parent's performance state'
might become common property at some point, allowing us to drop this
pm_runtime handling.
> Another option would simply be to manage this solely in the
> platform/soc specific genpd provider. Would that work?
Yes, I've had this in the very old iteration of mmcx fixup patchset
(even before mmcx-regulator came into play). It ended up with quite an
ugly piece of code.
>
> > Until that time I have changed code to
> > enforce having clock controller in pm resume state when gdsc is
> > enabled, thus CC itself votes on parent's (rpmhpd) performance state.
> >
> >
> > --
> > With best wishes
> > Dmitry
>
> Kind regards
> Uffe
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-08 8:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-07-27 20:19 [PATCH v6 0/6] clk: qcom: use power-domain for sm8250's clock controllers Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:19 ` [PATCH v6 1/8] dt-bindings: clock: qcom,dispcc-sm8x50: add mmcx power domain Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:19 ` [PATCH v6 2/8] dt-bindings: clock: qcom,videocc: " Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:19 ` [PATCH v6 3/8] clk: qcom: dispcc-sm8250: use runtime PM for the clock controller Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:20 ` [PATCH v6 4/8] clk: qcom: videocc-sm8250: " Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:20 ` [PATCH v6 5/8] clk: qcom: gdsc: enable optional power domain support Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:20 ` [PATCH v6 6/8] arm64: dts: qcom: sm8250: remove mmcx regulator Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:20 ` [PATCH v6 7/8] clk: qcom: dispcc-sm8250: stop using " Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-07-27 20:20 ` [PATCH v6 8/8] clk: qcom: videocc-sm8250: " Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-08-10 11:11 ` [PATCH v6 0/6] clk: qcom: use power-domain for sm8250's clock controllers Ulf Hansson
2021-08-26 18:31 ` Stephen Boyd
2021-08-26 21:56 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-08-29 3:51 ` Stephen Boyd
2021-08-29 15:54 ` Dmitry Baryshkov
2021-09-07 14:34 ` Ulf Hansson
2021-09-08 8:50 ` Dmitry Baryshkov [this message]
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='CAA8EJpokEq5JB63wYCpjssKt8neEpeW71pD9nUTjZ0Z_o6U=0A@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=dmitry.baryshkov@linaro.org \
--cc=agross@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.andersson@linaro.org \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonathan@marek.ca \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=tdas@codeaurora.org \
--cc=ulf.hansson@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: 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).