[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161102175944.GI16026@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:59:44 -0700
From: 'Stephen Boyd' <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
To: Sricharan <sricharan@...eaurora.org>
Cc: mturquette@...libre.com, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
rnayak@...eaurora.org, stanimir.varbanov@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] clk: qcom: gdsc: Add support for gdscs with HW
control
On 11/02, Sricharan wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> >On 10/24, Sricharan R wrote:
> >> @@ -164,6 +171,10 @@ static int gdsc_enable(struct generic_pm_domain *domain)
> >> */
> >> udelay(1);
> >>
> >> + /* Turn on HW trigger mode if supported */
> >> + if (sc->flags & HW_CTRL)
> >> + gdsc_hwctrl(sc, true);
> >> +
> >
> >It sounds like this will cause glitches if the hardware isn't
> >asserting their hw control bit by default? This has me concerned
> >that we can't just throw the hw control enable part into here,
> >because that bit doesn't live in the clock controller, instead it
> >lives in the hw block that is powered by the power domain?
> >
> >Or does the power on reset value of that hw control signal
> >asserted? If that's true then we should be ok to force it into hw
> >control mode by default.
> >
>
> The hw control bit is set by default. Instead its turned 'off'
> with the reset value. So it has to not
> be turned 'on' at some point
> to put the gdsc in hw control if required. This bit is part of the
> gdscr register. So i did not quite understand the reason for the
> glitch here ?
I mean the reset value of the hw control signal inside the device
that is inside the GDSC power domain. For example, the hw control
bit inside the video core.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
Powered by blists - more mailing lists