linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: add pclk_vio

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <575E240C.9060502@rock-chips.com>
Date:	Mon, 13 Jun 2016 11:10:04 +0800
From:	Xing Zheng <zhengxing@...k-chips.com>
To:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Cc:	Heiko Stübner <heiko@...ech.de>,
	elaine zhang <elaine.zhang@...k-chips.com>,
	Tao Huang <huangtao@...k-chips.com>,
	Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,
	Yakir Yang <ykk@...k-chips.com>,
	Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC..." <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: add pclk_vio_grf to critical clock on the
 RK3399

Hi Doug,

On 2016年06月13日 05:32, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Xing,
>
> On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 2:48 AM, Xing Zheng<zhengxing@...k-chips.com>  wrote:
>> The pclk_vio_grf supply power for GRF IOs, if it is disabled, will
>> cause abnormal operation of the GRF.
>>
>> The clock tree of the pclk_vio like this:
>>               | --> pclk_vio_grf
>> ... pclk_vio | --> pclk_mipi_dsi1
>>               | --> pclk_mipi_dsi0
>>
>> and the pclk_mipi_dsi0 and pclk_mipi_dsi1 don't have the flag
>> CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, and they will be disabled by clk_disable_unused
>> when startup:
>> clk_disable_unused
>>    --> clk_disable_unprepare
>>      --> clk_disable
>>        --> clk_core_disable(core->parent)
>>
>> then, the pclk_vio_grf also is disabled. Therefore, we need to add
>> pclk_vio_grf to critical clock and avoid to disable pclk_vio and
>> pclk_vio_grf.
>>
>> Tested-by: Yakir Yang<ykk@...k-chips.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Yakir Yang<ykk@...k-chips.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Brian Norris<briannorris@...omium.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Xing Zheng<zhengxing@...k-chips.com>
>> ---
>>
>>   drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c |    1 +
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c
>> index b6742fa..7ecb12c3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3399.c
>> @@ -1485,6 +1485,7 @@ static const char *const rk3399_cru_critical_clocks[] __initconst = {
>>          "gpll_hclk_perilp1_src",
>>          "gpll_aclk_perilp0_src",
>>          "gpll_aclk_perihp_src",
>> +       "pclk_vio_grf",
> This clock is only needed when doing video output (like eDP), right?
> That means it is not really a critical clock.  Critical clocks are
> supposed to be ones that are needed for the basic functioning of the
> system and that can never be turned off in any circumstances.  In this
> case, if someone were running a rk3399 device and didn't have any
> video output they would want this clock off.
>
> Can you figure out in exactly which circumstances this clock needs to
> be on and then add a proper consumer of this clock?  For instance, if
> this clock is needed whenever the VOP is outputting data, then the VOP
> should be a client and should turn this clock on and off when video is
> being output.  If this clock is needed whenever you access VOP
> registers, then the VOP should be a client and turn this clock on
> around register accesses.
>
> -Doug
>
Yes, the pclk_vio_grf is needed for doing video output.
andpclk_vio_grf supply for: grf_soc_con9, 20~26, grf_hdcp

 From our design folks, we have many GRF registers in different power 
domains,
and these GRF gates should be always enabled. In this case, we can avoid 
some
of the operations GRF registers exception problems, and it is only a 
very small
increase in  power consumption (aboult <=1ma).

I will refer the latest TRM to update a new patch for always enable 
these GRFs.

Please drop this patch.

Thanks.

-- 
- Xing Zheng