linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
	Taniya Das <tdas@codeaurora.org>,
	robh+dt@kernel.org
Cc: David Brown <david.brown@linaro.org>,
	Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-soc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] clk: qcom: Add Global Clock controller (GCC) driver for SC7180
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 06:03:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190925130346.42E0820640@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <347780b9-c66b-01c4-b547-b03de2cf3078@codeaurora.org>

Quoting Taniya Das (2019-09-25 04:20:07)
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> Please find my comments.
> 
> On 9/25/2019 4:42 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Taniya Das (2019-09-23 01:01:11)
> >> Hi Stephen,
> >>
> >> Thanks for your comments.
> >>
> >> On 9/19/2019 3:09 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>> Quoting Taniya Das (2019-09-18 02:50:18)
> >>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-sc7180.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-sc7180.c
> >>>> new file mode 100644
> >>>> index 000000000000..d47865d5408f
> >>>> --- /dev/null
> >>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-sc7180.c
> >>>> +                       .ops = &clk_branch2_ops,
> >>>> +               },
> >>>> +       },
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> > [...]
> >>>> +static struct clk_branch gcc_ufs_phy_phy_aux_clk = {
> >>>> +       .halt_reg = 0x77094,
> >>>> +       .halt_check = BRANCH_HALT,
> >>>> +       .hwcg_reg = 0x77094,
> >>>> +       .hwcg_bit = 1,
> >>>> +       .clkr = {
> >>>> +               .enable_reg = 0x77094,
> >>>> +               .enable_mask = BIT(0),
> >>>> +               .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> >>>> +                       .name = "gcc_ufs_phy_phy_aux_clk",
> >>>> +                       .parent_data = &(const struct clk_parent_data){
> >>>> +                               .hw = &gcc_ufs_phy_phy_aux_clk_src.clkr.hw,
> >>>> +                       },
> >>>> +                       .num_parents = 1,
> >>>> +                       .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> >>>> +                       .ops = &clk_branch2_ops,
> >>>> +               },
> >>>> +       },
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static struct clk_branch gcc_ufs_phy_rx_symbol_0_clk = {
> >>>> +       .halt_reg = 0x7701c,
> >>>> +       .halt_check = BRANCH_HALT_SKIP,
> >>>
> >>> Again, nobody has fixed the UFS driver to not need to do this halt skip
> >>> check for these clks? It's been over a year.
> >>>
> >>
> >> The UFS_PHY_RX/TX clocks could be left enabled due to certain HW boot
> >> configuration and thus during the late initcall of clk_disable there
> >> could be warnings of "clock stuck ON" in the dmesg. That is the reason
> >> also to use the BRANCH_HALT_SKIP flag.
> > 
> > Oh that's bad. Why do the clks stay on when we try to turn them off?
> >
> 
> Those could be due to the configuration selected by HW and SW cannot 
> override them, so traditionally we have never polled for CLK_OFF for 
> these clocks.

Is that the case or just a guess?

> 
> >>
> >> I would also check internally for the UFS driver fix you are referring here.
> > 
> > Sure. I keep asking but nothing is done :(
> > 
> >>
> >>>> +       .clkr = {
> >>>> +               .enable_reg = 0x7701c,
> >>>> +               .enable_mask = BIT(0),
> >>>> +               .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> >>>> +                       .name = "gcc_ufs_phy_rx_symbol_0_clk",
> >>>> +                       .ops = &clk_branch2_ops,
> >>>> +               },
> >>>> +       },
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> > [...]
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static struct clk_branch gcc_usb3_prim_phy_pipe_clk = {
> >>>> +       .halt_reg = 0xf058,
> >>>> +       .halt_check = BRANCH_HALT_SKIP,
> >>>
> >>> Why does this need halt_skip?
> >>
> >> This is required as the source is external PHY, so we want to not check
> >> for HALT.
> > 
> > This doesn't really answer my question. If the source is an external phy
> > then it should be listed as a clock in the DT binding and the parent
> > should be specified here. Unless something doesn't work because of that?
> > 
> 
> The USB phy is managed by the USB driver and clock driver is not aware 
> if USB driver models the phy as a clock. Thus we do want to keep a 
> dependency on the parent and not poll for CLK_ENABLE.

The clk driver should be aware of the USB driver modeling the phy as a
clk. We do that for other phys so what is the difference here?

> 
> >>
> >>>
> >>>> +       .clkr = {
> >>>> +               .enable_reg = 0xf058,
> >>>> +               .enable_mask = BIT(0),
> >>>> +               .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> >>>> +                       .name = "gcc_usb3_prim_phy_pipe_clk",
> >>>> +                       .ops = &clk_branch2_ops,
> >>>> +               },
> >>>> +       },
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> +static struct clk_branch gcc_usb_phy_cfg_ahb2phy_clk = {
> >>>> +       .halt_reg = 0x6a004,
> >>>> +       .halt_check = BRANCH_HALT,
> >>>> +       .hwcg_reg = 0x6a004,
> >>>> +       .hwcg_bit = 1,
> >>>> +       .clkr = {
> >>>> +               .enable_reg = 0x6a004,
> >>>> +               .enable_mask = BIT(0),
> >>>> +               .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> >>>> +                       .name = "gcc_usb_phy_cfg_ahb2phy_clk",
> >>>> +                       .ops = &clk_branch2_ops,
> >>>> +               },
> >>>> +       },
> >>>> +};
> >>>> +
> >>>> +/* Leave the clock ON for parent config_noc_clk to be kept enabled */
> >>>
> >>> There's no parent though... So I guess this means it keeps it enabled
> >>> implicitly in hardware?
> >>>
> >>
> >> These are not left enabled, but want to leave them enabled for clients
> >> on config NOC.
> > 
> > Sure. It just doesn't make sense to create clk structures and expose
> > them in the kernel when we just want to turn the bits on and leave them
> > on forever. Why not just do some register writes in probe for this
> > driver? Doesn't that work just as well and use less memory?
> > 
> 
> Even if I write these registers during probe, the late init check 
> 'clk_core_is_enabled' would return true and would be turned OFF, that is 
> the reason for marking them CRITICAL.
> 

That wouldn't happen if the clks weren't registered though, no?


  reply	other threads:[~2019-09-25 13:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-09-18  9:50 [PATCH v3 0/3] Add Global Clock controller (GCC) driver for SC7180 Taniya Das
2019-09-18  9:50 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] clk: qcom: rcg: update the DFS macro for RCG Taniya Das
2019-09-18  9:50 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] dt-bindings: clk: qcom: Add YAML schemas for the GCC clock bindings Taniya Das
2019-09-18 17:52   ` Matthias Kaehlcke
2019-09-23  6:33     ` Taniya Das
2019-09-27 17:27   ` Rob Herring
2019-10-14 10:16     ` Taniya Das
     [not found]   ` <20190918212614.448FC20882@mail.kernel.org>
2019-10-14 10:17     ` Taniya Das
2019-09-18  9:50 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] clk: qcom: Add Global Clock controller (GCC) driver for SC7180 Taniya Das
2019-09-19 11:08   ` Rajendra Nayak
2019-09-20  4:00     ` Taniya Das
2019-09-20  4:44       ` Rajendra Nayak
     [not found]   ` <20190918213946.DC03521924@mail.kernel.org>
2019-09-23  8:01     ` Taniya Das
2019-09-24 23:12       ` Stephen Boyd
2019-09-25 11:20         ` Taniya Das
2019-09-25 13:03           ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2019-09-27  7:37             ` Taniya Das
2019-10-01 14:38               ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-03 10:31                 ` Taniya Das
2019-10-03 16:01                   ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-04 17:39                     ` Taniya Das
2019-10-04 23:20                       ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-09  9:19                         ` Taniya Das
2019-10-10  4:16                           ` Stephen Boyd
2019-10-11 10:28                             ` Taniya Das

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=20190925130346.42E0820640@mail.kernel.org \
    --to=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --cc=david.brown@linaro.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-soc@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
    --cc=rnayak@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
    --cc=tdas@codeaurora.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).