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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EBFBC3F6B0 for ; Mon, 1 Aug 2022 02:38:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S239213AbiHACiJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Jul 2022 22:38:09 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54654 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S239232AbiHACiH (ORCPT ); Sun, 31 Jul 2022 22:38:07 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x62f.google.com (mail-pl1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D6CF13D09 for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 19:38:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id q22so1079235plr.9 for ; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 19:38:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=yvmSjML8a5pPk4nlvJWOM6aDBbo3zvbP+pNRPGiTonI=; b=vA3/CQNlFFtMHU+07rq77cfaOIAsYb+ML1fq7rQQD67WeXZiBMzCJ9lZ63IFx7zgl0 FLDjLtpvfXTNSHvqFR3QWxDqQFYZFC186vmKschB2UBJA2vRI9sJGAA2HRXObFSTENs8 hGc51EQt43kRo8nP7AMUHJV8nZe7Th/dENdEJ9p6jt5HYoc1Jeioj7lS+n1tw/OoPA36 BWNVBlJlo3OMTyxYKbyAT/WsRpyJv0Wjq9SknmR+TQOlVq9MVf/ZOJV26Vbjxj3HgP+U fvgpCQq3IYem8qJ9rAT3KBhA5Y9HwCc/Ov2qaV6Z7tAFBOJAs1QX6ON1Ah2VrqFujU0J YWpQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=yvmSjML8a5pPk4nlvJWOM6aDBbo3zvbP+pNRPGiTonI=; b=warjZ9cftEA4kqs/Oyviemmfidh6NhWvq35Rg5tRSSf2Hp+QhXV9mi0m1GohIcHJyD 1Jgyx2/0DDU1DeT5vASj9YTtIp3HBoomnFhUt/4RzK6vpBY+XViMQiljOBgCpQEL1Hbx 7JVCQ6GYOe5adIKacMdAcSirLxAzn49I4p9k/PeAj+2qEte9VKMfBEYM1146phUDEURW zGSxNwa6BZUH/JIubcAQ4dJmvgHOGR9PUXUsJo6/xTnwvEdO0b8gVq8f+nEHpSkNE1rN arZKzFv9rEviYX2yIzeoMM7If9PGhR/nyCagqvN/A7V3E478SSFzdDZejUk4PnY56O+X WGjw== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo1Z/bttUDwVMkcpJ/IgxnfD2w5Kxznpbf/S5zpyrlAAbTZrxvyH BpaOcsx0+ifEL79G/dhRtN3SVw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR4z76zzZuloVZRYXx+iiBvptQGrQ0c6R1Pm71Sj+85P7YkqFiRVHXE3d5bSSHDrA2vuEGRVLQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:4b50:b0:1f0:5643:fa5c with SMTP id mi16-20020a17090b4b5000b001f05643fa5cmr17836502pjb.131.1659321485726; Sun, 31 Jul 2022 19:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([122.171.18.80]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y127-20020a623285000000b0052cdb06c125sm5015850pfy.159.2022.07.31.19.38.04 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 31 Jul 2022 19:38:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2022 08:07:56 +0530 From: Viresh Kumar To: Manivannan Sadhasivam Cc: Bjorn Andersson , Andy Gross , Krzysztof Kozlowski , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Rob Herring , Vincent Guittot , Johan Hovold , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] cpufreq: qcom-hw: Move clocks to CPU node Message-ID: <20220801023756.76jswkbwivuntqof@vireshk-i7> References: <20220715160933.GD12197@workstation> <20220718015742.uwskqo55qd67jx2w@vireshk-i7> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220718015742.uwskqo55qd67jx2w@vireshk-i7> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On 18-07-22, 07:27, Viresh Kumar wrote: > The OPP tables, which are part of the CPU nodes, mentions clock rates. > Are these values for the cxo/gpll clocks or the clock that reaches the > CPUs? I believe the latter. The DT is not really complete if the CPU > node mentions the frequency, but not the source clock. It works for > you because you don't want to do clk_set_rate() in this case, but then > it leaves other frameworks, like OPP, confused and rightly so. > > Normally, there is always a difference in what the OPP table contains > as frequency value and what the hardware programs, mostly it is small > though. It shouldn't prevent us from having the hierarchy clearly > defined in the DT. > > Based on your description, I think it would be better to make > cpufreq-hw a clock provider and CPUs the consumer of it. It would then > allow the OPP core to not carry the hack to make it all work. Bjorn / Mani, Can we please get this sorted out ? I don't want to carry an unnecessary hack in the OPP core for this. -- viresh