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=-7.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable 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 9DAB8C433E0 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 14:11:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79D7D20884 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 14:11:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726425AbgGCOL4 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2020 10:11:56 -0400 Received: from gloria.sntech.de ([185.11.138.130]:40308 "EHLO gloria.sntech.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726035AbgGCOLz (ORCPT ); Fri, 3 Jul 2020 10:11:55 -0400 Received: from p5b127e6f.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([91.18.126.111] helo=phil.localnet) by gloria.sntech.de with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jrMPr-0001Ch-St; Fri, 03 Jul 2020 16:11:47 +0200 From: Heiko Stuebner To: Jagan Teki Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Myl=E8ne?= Josserand , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Rob Herring , devicetree , linux-kernel , "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." , kernel@collabora.com, linux-clk , linux-arm-kernel Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] clk: rockchip: rk3288: Handle clock tree for rk3288w Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 16:11:46 +0200 Message-ID: <1793210.9Kb5SQUFvz@phil> In-Reply-To: References: <20200602080644.11333-1-mylene.josserand@collabora.com> <20200602080644.11333-2-mylene.josserand@collabora.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Jagan, Am Montag, 29. Juni 2020, 21:11:03 CEST schrieb Jagan Teki: > On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 1:37 PM Mylène Josserand > wrote: > > > > The revision rk3288w has a different clock tree about "hclk_vio" > > clock, according to the BSP kernel code. > > > > This patch handles this difference by detecting which device-tree > > we are using. If it is a "rockchip,rk3288-cru", let's register > > the clock tree as it was before. If the device-tree node is > > "rockchip,rk3288w-cru", we will apply the difference with this > > version of this SoC. > > > > Noticed that this new device-tree compatible must be handled in > > bootloader such as u-boot. > > > > Signed-off-by: Mylène Josserand > > --- > > drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c > > index cc2a177bbdbf..204976e2d0cb 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c > > @@ -425,8 +425,6 @@ static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288_clk_branches[] __initdata = { > > COMPOSITE(0, "aclk_vio0", mux_pll_src_cpll_gpll_usb480m_p, CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, > > RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(31), 6, 2, MFLAGS, 0, 5, DFLAGS, > > RK3288_CLKGATE_CON(3), 0, GFLAGS), > > - DIV(0, "hclk_vio", "aclk_vio0", 0, > > - RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(28), 8, 5, DFLAGS), > > COMPOSITE(0, "aclk_vio1", mux_pll_src_cpll_gpll_usb480m_p, CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, > > RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(31), 14, 2, MFLAGS, 8, 5, DFLAGS, > > RK3288_CLKGATE_CON(3), 2, GFLAGS), > > @@ -819,6 +817,16 @@ static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288_clk_branches[] __initdata = { > > INVERTER(0, "pclk_isp", "pclk_isp_in", RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(29), 3, IFLAGS), > > }; > > > > +static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288w_hclkvio_branch[] __initdata = { > > + DIV(0, "hclk_vio", "aclk_vio1", 0, > > + RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(28), 8, 5, DFLAGS), > > +}; > > + > > +static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288_hclkvio_branch[] __initdata = { > > + DIV(0, "hclk_vio", "aclk_vio0", 0, > > + RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(28), 8, 5, DFLAGS), > > +}; > > + > > static const char *const rk3288_critical_clocks[] __initconst = { > > "aclk_cpu", > > "aclk_peri", > > @@ -936,6 +944,14 @@ static void __init rk3288_clk_init(struct device_node *np) > > RK3288_GRF_SOC_STATUS1); > > rockchip_clk_register_branches(ctx, rk3288_clk_branches, > > ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288_clk_branches)); > > + > > + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "rockchip,rk3288w-cru")) > > + rockchip_clk_register_branches(ctx, rk3288w_hclkvio_branch, > > + ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288w_hclkvio_branch)); > > + else > > + rockchip_clk_register_branches(ctx, rk3288_hclkvio_branch, > > + ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288_hclkvio_branch)); > > + > > Sorry for the late query on this. I am a bit unclear about this > compatible change, does Linux expect to replace rockchip,rk3288-cru > with rockchip,rk3288w-cru in bootloader if the chip is RK3288w? or > append the existing cru compatible node with rockchip,rk3288w-cru? > because replace new cru node make clock never probe since the > CLK_OF_DECLARE checking rockchip,rk3288-cru I guess right now we'd expect "rockchip,rk3288w-cru", "rockchip,rk3288-cru", Thinking again about this, I'm wondering if we should switch to having only one per variant ... like on the two rk3188 variants, so declaring separate rk3288-cru and rk3288w-cru of-clks with shared common code.