linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] ARM: davinci: convert to common clock framework

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <7950489e-2e66-9ed6-9b4e-239dce6bf87a@lechnology.com>
Date:   Thu, 4 Jan 2018 15:22:25 -0600
From:   David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>
To:     Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
Cc:     Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 6/7] ARM: davinci: convert to common clock framework

On 01/04/2018 01:26 PM, Adam Ford wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:50 AM, David Lechner <david@...hnology.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 1/4/18 6:39 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>>>
>>> On Monday 01 January 2018 05:09 AM, David Lechner wrote:
>>>>
>>>> This converts all of arch/arm/mach-davinci to the common clock framework.
>>>> The clock drivers from clock.c and psc.c have been moved to drivers/clk,
>>>> so these files are removed.
>>>>
>>>> There is one subtle change in the clock trees. AUX, BPDIV and OSCDIV
>>>> clocks now have "ref_clk" as a parent instead of the PLL clock. These
>>>> clocks are part of the PLL's MMIO block, but they bypass the PLL and
>>>> therefore it makes more sense to have "ref_clk" as their parent since
>>>> "ref_clk" is the input clock of the PLL.
>>>>
>>>> CONFIG_DAVINCI_RESET_CLOCKS is removed since the common clock frameworks
>>>> takes care of disabling unused clocks.
>>>>
>>>> Known issue: This breaks CPU frequency scaling on da850.
>>>
>>>
>>> This functionality needs to be restored as part of this series since we
>>> cannot commit anything with regressions.
>>>
>>
>> Do you have a suggestion on how to accomplish this? I don't have a board for
>> testing, so I don't have a way of knowing if my changes will work or not.
> 
> I work for Logic PD who makes the original da850-evm.  I can help if
> you want to send me patches.  It would be better if you had a git repo
> setup where I could just clone the repo and tests.
> 
> Having a larger collection of smaller the patches would also give me
> the ability to bisect down to help determine what actually breaks the
> da850-evm vs a few large patches.
> 
> Do you still need me to run the board with some of the extra debugging
> enabled, or should I wait for the next round of patches?
> 

You might as well wait until I resubmit. There are going to be some significant
changes.