[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <38cfee53-8699-b3c1-22e0-cb5355ce9387@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2016 10:52:00 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc: Sarangdhar Joshi <spjoshi@...eaurora.org>,
Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
Trilok Soni <tsoni@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] remoteproc: Add support for xo clock
On 11/01/2016 10:46 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org> wrote:
>> On 10/31/2016 05:05 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>> On Tue 25 Oct 13:57 PDT 2016, Sarangdhar Joshi wrote:
>>>
>>>> Add xo clock support required to boot up Qualcomm ADSP processor.
>>>> The ADSP remoteproc driver keeps xo clock enabled until the
>>>> driver receives "handover" irq, in order to allow ADSP processor
>>>> to vote for xo clock with rpm.
>>> Looks good, thanks.
>>>
>>> We have to add the clock to the DT binding and run that by Rob again,
>>> before merging the driver and this patch.
>>>
>> Maybe we should make the xo clock required. We always have a clock for
>> it somewhere, either RPM controlled or as a fixed rate clock so it
>> should work just as well.
>>
> As far as I can see it is required, after Sarangdhar's patch - so this
> is what I meant we need to add to the DT binding before merging that.
> And as you say, we can always make it reference "xo_board" for now.
>
Ah good then. Brain must have misread the patch.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists