lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Nov]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RESEND/PATCH v6 3/3] clk: qcom: Add A53 clock driver
On 11/11, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> On 11/03/2016 08:28 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> >On Wed 02 Nov 15:55 PDT 2016, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> >>On 11/02, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> >>>On Thu 27 Oct 18:54 PDT 2016, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On 10/19, Georgi Djakov wrote:
> >>>>>Add a driver for the A53 Clock Controller. It is a hardware block that
> >>>>>implements a combined mux and half integer divider functionality. It can
> >>>>>choose between a fixed-rate clock or the dedicated A53 PLL. The source
> >>>>>and the divider can be set both at the same time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>This is required for enabling CPU frequency scaling on platforms like
> >>>>>MSM8916.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Please Cc DT reviewers.
> >>>>
> >>>>>Signed-off-by: Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@linaro.org>
> >>>>>---
> >>>>> .../devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,a53cc.txt | 22 +++
> >>>>> drivers/clk/qcom/Kconfig | 8 ++
> >>>>> drivers/clk/qcom/Makefile | 1 +
> >>>>> drivers/clk/qcom/a53cc.c | 155 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >>>>> 4 files changed, 186 insertions(+)
> >>>>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,a53cc.txt
> >>>>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/qcom/a53cc.c
> >>>>>
> >>>>>diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,a53cc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,a53cc.txt
> >>>>>new file mode 100644
> >>>>>index 000000000000..a025f062f177
> >>>>>--- /dev/null
> >>>>>+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,a53cc.txt
> >>>>>@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
> >>>>>+Qualcomm A53 CPU Clock Controller Binding
> >>>>>+------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>+The A53 CPU Clock Controller is hardware, which provides a combined
> >>>>>+mux and divider functionality for the CPU clocks. It can choose between
> >>>>>+a fixed rate clock and the dedicated A53 PLL.
> >>>>>+
> >>>>>+Required properties :
> >>>>>+- compatible : shall contain:
> >>>>>+
> >>>>>+ "qcom,a53cc"
> >>>>>+
> >>>>>+- reg : shall contain base register location and length
> >>>>>+ of the APCS region
> >>>>>+- #clock-cells : shall contain 1
> >>>>>+
> >>>>>+Example:
> >>>>>+
> >>>>>+ apcs: syscon@b011000 {
> >>>>>+ compatible = "qcom,a53cc", "syscon";
> >>>>
> >>>>Why is it a syscon? Is that part used?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>I use the register at offset 8 for interrupting the other subsystems, so
> >>>this must be available as something I can poke.
> >>>
> >>>Which makes me think that this should be described as a "simple-mfd" and
> >>>"syscon" with the a53cc node as a child - grabbing the regmap of the
> >>>syscon parent, rather then ioremapping the same region again.
> >>>
> >>
> >>That's sort of a question for DT reviewers. The register space
> >>certainly seems like a free for all with a tilt toward power
> >>management of the CPU, similar to how this was done on Krait
> >>based designs.
> >>
> >
> >Right. But this kind of mashup blocks was the reason why simple-mfd was
> >put in place.
> >
>
> Ok, thanks for the comments. Then i will make it look like this:
>
> apcs: syscon@b011000 {
> compatible = "syscon", "simple-mfd";
> reg = <0x0b011000 0x1000>;
>
> a53mux: clock {
> compatible = "qcom,msm8916-a53cc";
> #clock-cells = <1>;
> };
> };
>
> Thanks,
> Georgi
>
> >>I wonder why we didn't make up some provider/consumer binding for
> >>the "kicking" feature used by SMD/RPM code. Then this could be a
> >>clock provider and a "kick" provider (haha #kick-cells) and the
> >>usage of syscon/regmap wouldn't be mandatory.
> >>
> >
> >I did consider doing that, but had enough dependencies to put in place
> >as it was.
> >
> >I'm in favour of us inventing a kicker API and it's found outside out
> >use cases as well (e.g. virtio/rpmsg).
> >

I'd rather we did this kicker API as well. That way we don't need
to make a syscon and a simple-mfd to get software to work
properly. Don't other silicon vendors need a kicker API as well?
How are they kicking remote processors in other places? GPIOs?

--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-11-14 23:22    [W:0.072 / U:10.560 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site