lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC 0/2] mach-omap2: handle autoidle denial
* Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com> [181004 15:53]:
> On 04/10/18 18:07, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com> [181004 14:47]:
> > > On 04/10/18 17:25, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > It seems we should just provide a generic interface for
> > > > clk_allow_autoidle() and clk_deny_autoidle()? Otherwise we'll
> > > > be forever stuck with pdata callbacks it seems.
> > >
> > > The TI clock driver is actually providing these APIs, so that should be
> > > fine. I don't think there is any use / need for pdata callbacks atm, it just
> > > happens hwmod core is calling these at the moment which might have confused
> > > you.
> >
> > Hmm OK. So do we already have some way to deny autoidle for a
> > clock from ti-sysc.c driver without pdata callbacks?
> >
> > Suman pointed out few days ago that for a reset driver to work
> > we must do clkdm_deny_idle() and clkdm_allow_idle() as the hwmod
> > code does. I gues that really just boils down to doing clk deny
> > idle and allow idle on the clockdomain clkctrl clock?
>
> Clkdm handling is done via pdata callbacks, that is a separate topic from
> iclk autoidle. Iclk:s are effectively only for omap3, clkdm autoidle /
> deny_idle etc. are a generic mechanism that must be used on omap4+ if you
> want to prevent autoidle of certain domains/IPs.

OK thanks.

Tony

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-10-04 18:09    [W:0.086 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site