lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Apr]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v5] drm/pl111: Initial drm/kms driver for pl111
On 04/12, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> On 04/12/2017 09:40 AM, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 12:13 AM, Eric Anholt <eric@anholt.net> wrote:
> >
> >> Oh, one last thing I think we need to figure out: I'm using TIM2_CLKSEL,
> >> which seems to be necessary on this platform. My understanding is that
> >> this means that the pixel clock is divided from clcdclk instead of
> >> apb_pclk. Do you agree?
> >
> > Yes the pixed clock is always derived from clcdclk.
> >
> > In most older ARM reference designs this is a VCO so that
> > is why there is a clk_set_rate() on this in the fbdev code.
> > (On some platforms that even has no effect I guess.)
> >
> >> The fbdev driver is using
> >> clk_get(&fb->dev->dev, NULL) and not TIM2_CLKSEL, which I'm surprised by
> >> because I would have thought that would give us the first clock from the
> >> DT node (also clcdclk).
> >
> > So that thing is a 1-bit line that can select one of two clocks
> > to be muxed into the PL111/CLCD.
> >
> > I guess that up until now all platforms just left that line dangling in
> > the silicon. Congratulations, you came here first ;)
> >
> > Though when I look at the Nomadik it seems that it might be muxing
> > the clock between 48 and 72 MHz, and I've been using 48MHz
> > all along ooopsie.
> >
> > The current assumption in the bindings is that we have only
> > one clock and TIM2_CLKSEL is N/A.
> >
> > If we want proper clcdclk handling with CLKSEL you should
> > probably add some code to implement a real mux clock for
> > this using <linux/clock-provider.h> and drivers/clk/clk-mux.c
> > with select COMMON_CLK
> > so that the driver still only sees clcdclk but that in turn is a
> > mux that can select one of two sources and will react to
> > the clk_set_rate() call by selecting the clock which is
> > closest in frequency to what you want.
> >
> > This needs a small patch to alter the bindings too I guess.
> > A small clock node inside the CLCD, just like PCI bridges have
> > irqchips inside them etc:
> >
> > clcd@10120000 {
> > compatible = "arm,pl110", "arm,primecell";
> > reg = <0x10120000 0x1000>;
> > (...)
> > clocks = <&clcdclk>, <&foo>;
> > clock-names = "clcdclk", "apb_pclk";
> >
> > clcdclk: clock-controller@0 {
> > compatible = "arm,pl11x-clock-mux";
> > clocks = <&source_a>, <&source_b>;
> > };
> > };
> >
> > This can be set up easily in the OF probe path since that
> > is what we're doing: just look for this subnode, if it is there
> > create the clock controller.
> >
> > I do not think the clk maintainers would mind a small mux
> > clock controller inside the CLCD driver to handle this mux
> > if we need it.
>
> Hi Linus,
>
> Indeed it's the way of handling this use case, but no need to add
> a clk node here, you can copy what we did in pwm-meson, meson-gx-mmc.c,
> or dwmac-meson8b.c (we went further by also adding clk dividers).
>
> In the probe code, simply add a clock mux provider with the two parents
> clock names (these can and should be platform specific) and only call
> a clk_set_parent() with the clock specified in the node clocks cell.
>

+1

Avoiding a binding update is nice.

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

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-04-12 18:38    [W:0.066 / U:0.176 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site