linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: tdas@codeaurora.org
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>
Cc: Andy Gross <andy.gross@linaro.org>,
	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,
	linux-clk-owner@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] clk: qcom: Add lpass clock controller driver for SDM845
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2018 16:21:01 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <360c18d625d6e4792e9ba830c6d0b6ea@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5f1b1ab5-e2eb-05ff-7b6d-8557f6dd2ad9@codeaurora.org>

On 2018-10-19 16:09, Taniya Das wrote:
> On 10/17/2018 7:50 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> Quoting Taniya Das (2018-10-17 05:04:10)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 10/17/2018 5:07 PM, Taniya Das wrote:
>>>> Hello Stephen,
>>>> 
>>>> On 10/12/2018 11:05 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>>> Quoting Taniya Das (2018-10-09 23:12:27)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 10/10/2018 2:22 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>>>>> Quoting Taniya Das (2018-10-09 10:26:38)
>>>>>>>> Hello Stephen,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 10/8/2018 8:14 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Quoting Taniya Das (2018-10-04 05:02:26)
>>>>>>>>>> Add support for the lpass clock controller found on SDM845 
>>>>>>>>>> based
>>>>>>>>>> devices.
>>>>>>>>>> This would allow lpass peripheral loader drivers to control 
>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> clocks to
>>>>>>>>>> bring the subsystem out of reset.
>>>>>>>>>> LPASS clocks present on the global clock controller would be
>>>>>>>>>> registered
>>>>>>>>>> with the clock framework based on the device tree flag. Also 
>>>>>>>>>> do
>>>>>>>>>> not gate
>>>>>>>>>> these clocks if they are left unused.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Why not gate them? This statement states what the code is 
>>>>>>>>> doing,
>>>>>>>>> not why
>>>>>>>>> it's doing it which is the more crucial information that should 
>>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>>> described in the commit text. Also, please add a comment about 
>>>>>>>>> it
>>>>>>>>> to the
>>>>>>>>> code next to the flag.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I am concerned that it doesn't make any sense though, so 
>>>>>>>>> probably it
>>>>>>>>> shouldn't be marked as CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED and it's papering over 
>>>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>>> other larger bug that needs to be fixed.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It does not have any bug, it is just that to access these lpass
>>>>>>>> registers we would need the GCC lpass registers to be enabled. I 
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> update the same in the commit text.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> During clock late_init these clocks should not be accessed to 
>>>>>>>> check
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> clock status as they would result in unclocked access. The 
>>>>>>>> client
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> request these clocks in the correct order and it would not have 
>>>>>>>> any
>>>>>>>> issue.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> That seems like the bug right there. If the LPASS registers can't 
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> accessed unless the clks in GCC are enabled then this driver 
>>>>>>> needs to
>>>>>>> turn the clks on before reading/writing registers. Marking the 
>>>>>>> clks as
>>>>>>> ignore unused is skipping around the real problem.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If the driver requests for the clocks they would maintain the 
>>>>>> order. But
>>>>>> if the clock late init call is invoked before the driver requests, 
>>>>>> there
>>>>>> is no way I could manage this dependency, that is the only reason 
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> mark them unused.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Which driver are we talking about here? The lpass clk driver? 
>>>>> Presumably
>>>>> the lpass clk driver would request the GCC clks and turn them on in
>>>>> probe and then register any lpass clks. If the lpass clk driver 
>>>>> probes
>>>>> bfeore late init, then the gcc clks will be enabled and everything
>>>>> works, and if the lpass clk driver probes after late init then the 
>>>>> clks
>>>>> that can't be touched without gcc clks enabled won't be registered, 
>>>>> and
>>>>> then they won't be touched. What goes wrong?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Okay, sure, I will take the GCC clock handles and then 
>>>> enable/disable
>>>> them accordingly.
>>>> 
>>>> I missed earlier, so here is what you suggest
>>> 
>>> gcc_probe --> GCC LPASS clocks registered.
>>> lpass_probe --> clk_get on gcc_lpass_clocks/ clk_prepare_enable -->
>>> register the lpass clocks --> clk_disable_unprepare gcc_lpass_clocks.
>> 
>> Why did the gcc_lpass_clocks get turned off? Shouldn't they just stay
>> enabled all the time?
>> 
> 
> I don't think they are kept enabled all the time.
> 
>>> 
>>> But the problem is not during the above. It is the below
>>> static void clk_disable_unused_subtree(struct clk_core *core)
>>> {
>>> ....
>>> 
>>>           if (clk_core_is_enabled(core)) {  --> This access fails.
>>> ....
>>> 
>>> }
>>> 
>> 
>> You may need to add some prepare_ops to turn on clks needed to
>> read/write lpass registers. Or you can look into using some sort of
>> genpd to enable required clks when these clks are enabled or disabled.
>> But I suspect it would be easier to just leave the clks in GCC for 
>> lpass
>> always enabled and not worry about the complicated genpd things.
>> 
> 
> I need to check if keeping them enabled/marking them CRITICAL could
> have an impact on the reset of the subsystem.

I have checked internally with the teams and the GCC LPASS clocks could 
be left enabled.
Would submit a patch keeping them CRITICAL.

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-25 10:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-04 12:02 [PATCH v6] Add support for LPASS clock controller " Taniya Das
2018-10-04 12:02 ` [PATCH v6] clk: qcom: Add lpass clock controller driver " Taniya Das
2018-10-08  2:44   ` Stephen Boyd
2018-10-09 17:26     ` Taniya Das
2018-10-09 20:52       ` Stephen Boyd
2018-10-10  6:12         ` Taniya Das
2018-10-12 17:35           ` Stephen Boyd
2018-10-17 11:37             ` Taniya Das
2018-10-17 12:04               ` Taniya Das
2018-10-17 14:20                 ` Stephen Boyd
2018-10-19 10:39                   ` Taniya Das
2018-10-25 10:51                     ` tdas [this message]
2018-10-29 18:44                       ` Stephen Boyd

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=360c18d625d6e4792e9ba830c6d0b6ea@codeaurora.org \
    --to=tdas@codeaurora.org \
    --cc=andy.gross@linaro.org \
    --cc=david.brown@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-clk-owner@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=sboyd@kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v6] clk: qcom: Add lpass clock controller driver for SDM845' \
    /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

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).