[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190119081211.73844b6a@aktux>
Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2019 08:12:11 +0100
From: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info>
To: "J, KEERTHY" <j-keerthy@...com>
Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Discussions about the Letux Kernel
<letux-kernel@...nphoenux.org>, <paul@...an.com>,
<sboyd@...nel.org>, <mturquette@...libre.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <t-kristo@...com>,
<bcousson@...libre.com>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [Letux-kernel] [PATCH v3 3/3] arm: omap_hwmod disable ick
autoidling when a hwmod requires that
On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 12:09:48 +0530
"J, KEERTHY" <j-keerthy@...com> wrote:
> On 1/19/2019 1:18 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info> [190118 19:42]:
> >> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:38:47 +0100
> >> Andreas Kemnade <andreas@...nade.info> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:36:30 -0800
> >>> Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>>> til the next workaround.
> >>>>
> >>>>> That flags also causes the iclk being enabled/disabled
> >>>>> manually.
> >>>>
> >>>> Yes but SWSUP_IDLE for the interface clock to me currently
> >>>> just means:
> >>>>
> >>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock"
> >>>>
> >>> well, if we want to manually disable it and not automatically,
> >>> we have to disable autoidle or it will be automatically disabled.
> >>>
> >>> Disabling it manually when it is already auto-disabled (by autoidle) is
> >>> just practically a no-op towards the clock.
> >>>
> >>>> and with your changes it becomes:
> >>>>
> >>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock and block
> >>>> autoidle while in use".
> >>>>
> >>>> So aren't we now changing the way things behave in general
> >>>> for SWSUP_IDLE?
> >>>>
> >>> Yes, we are, so proper testing is needed. But If I read those comments
> >>> it was always intended this way but not fully implemented because it
> >>> appeared to be more work like needing a usecounter (which my patchset
> >>> also adds) for that autoidle flag.
> >>>
> >> and there are quite few hwmods marked by this flag.
> >> And then there are those clocks marked by this flags (on am33xx) which
> >> do not have that autoidle feature at all, so the risk is not too high.
> >
> > Keerthy, can you please test this series on top of the
> > related clock patches with your am335x PM test cases?
>
> Can you point me to the clock series that needs to be tested
> along with this?
>
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-clk/list/?series=66691
Regards,
Andreas
Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped
Powered by blists - more mailing lists