lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 16/19] clk: tegra: pll: Add Set_default logic
On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:31:22AM -0400, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> On 4/30/2015 6:12 AM, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 01:21:46PM -0400, Rhyland Klein wrote:
> >> From: Bill Huang <bilhuang@nvidia.com>
> >>
> >> Add logic which (if specified for a pll) can verify that a PLL is set
> >> to the proper default value and if not can set it. This can be
> >> specified per PLL as each will have different default values.
> >>
> >
> > Why can't we just set the default values at init time?
>
> Sorry, I did some investigation into this and wrote up a nice response
> ... and forgot to hit send ...
>
> The reason this can't be run only once at init time is the following. In
> reality, we want to have the defined default values written as early as
> possible. Idealy, the bootloader could write these, so the kernel need
> only check, see they are right, and not touch them. However, since we
> can't rely on the bootloader to do so, the kernel needs the support to
> be able to write these default values. At init time, some pll's will be
> enabled (from bootloader) and because they are enabled (and the rest of
> the clk framework isn't done being setup yet) we can't disable them to
> write the full register values. Therefore, the set_defaults logic uses a
> 2-pass system.
>
> first pass: Try to set defaults at init/registration time. If pll is
> disabled, this works fine. If it is enabled, then we update a subset of
> the register as a "best effort" setting of the defaults.
>
> second pass: Should only run the first time we go through set_rate for a
> pll. If the first pass already wrote default value, then it skips this
> step. Otherwise it will go in, once the pll is disabled in the set_rate
> path, and write the full register default.
>
> This is required because some registers need to be reset to the default
> values we have to ensure locking works correctly. Does that make sense?

Ok. I see... Should we print a warning (pr_warn()) the bootloader isn't
initializing the hw correctly if the second pass needs to write the default
values?

Thanks,

Peter.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-11 14:01    [W:0.067 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site