Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7180: Add LPASS clock controller nodes

[Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>]

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 10:34 AM Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:56 PM Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> >
> > Update the clock controller nodes for Low power audio subsystem
> > functionality.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org>
> > ---
>
> Somewhere here you should be pointing to the unlanded bindings patch, AKA:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/1594795010-9074-3-git-send-email-tdas@codeaurora.org
>
> As per usual the fact that are using a new bindings #include file
> means Qualcomm maintainers and clock maintainers will need to
> coordinate landing and this needs to be pointed out.
>
>
> >  arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi
> > index 2be81a2..8c30a17 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/sc7180.dtsi
> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> >  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,dispcc-sc7180.h>
> >  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gcc-sc7180.h>
> >  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,gpucc-sc7180.h>
> > +#include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,lpasscorecc-sc7180.h>
> >  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,rpmh.h>
> >  #include <dt-bindings/clock/qcom,videocc-sc7180.h>
> >  #include <dt-bindings/interconnect/qcom,osm-l3.h>
> > @@ -2136,6 +2137,27 @@
> >                         };
> >                 };
> >
> > +               lpasscc: clock-controller@62d00000 {
> > +                       compatible = "qcom,sc7180-lpasscorecc";
> > +                       reg = <0 0x62d00000 0 0x50000>,
> > +                           <0 0x62780000 0 0x30000>;
> > +                       reg-names = "lpass_core_cc", "lpass_audio_cc";
> > +                       clocks = <&gcc GCC_LPASS_CFG_NOC_SWAY_CLK>;
> > +                       clock-names = "iface";
> > +                       power-domains = <&lpass_hm LPASS_CORE_HM_GDSCR>;
> > +                       #clock-cells = <1>;
> > +                       #power-domain-cells = <1>;
> > +               };
> > +
> > +               lpass_hm: clock-controller@63000000 {
> > +                       compatible = "qcom,sc7180-lpasshm";
> > +                       reg = <0 0x63000000 0 0x28>;
> > +                       clocks = <&gcc GCC_LPASS_CFG_NOC_SWAY_CLK>;
> > +                       clock-names = "iface";
> > +                       #clock-cells = <1>;
> > +                       #power-domain-cells = <1>;
> > +               };
>
> Question: would it ever make sense for a board not to need this clock
> controller?  I ask because the sdm845 "lpass" clock controller is
> "disabled" by default but yours here isn't.  I know sc7180 and sdm845
> work pretty differently and perhaps the sdm845's default of "disabled"
> was just overkill, but I thought I'd ask.
>
>
> > +
> >                 etm@7040000 {
> >                         compatible = "arm,coresight-etm4x", "arm,primecell";
> >                         reg = <0 0x07040000 0 0x1000>;
>
> Your sort order is off.  You should be sorting by unit address.  Note
> that the "ETM" has an extra 0 before its 7, so you're comparing 63 to
> 07 and you should be after.
>
> Other than those small things above this patch looks like it matches
> the example in the bindings, so as long as Rob / the clock guys are
> fine with the bindings then this seems good to go.

So it looks like the bindings landed and one would think we'd be good
to go.  Except that when I mixed your device tree patch with the
driver that landed things went boom.

Can you please re-post addressing my concerns above and also adding
"bi_tcxo" as I have done in the bindings example here:

https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200731133006.1.Iee81b115f5be50d6d69500fe1bda11bba6e16143@changeid

Thanks!

-Doug