[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <580a2c04-67ca-17f3-54ec-5b07ca46c254@denx.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2022 00:07:13 +0200
From: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
To: Fabien DESSENNE <fabien.dessenne@...s.st.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: stm32: improve bank clocks management
On 4/25/22 11:27, Fabien DESSENNE wrote:
> Hi Marek
>
>
> On 22/04/2022 18:26, Marek Vasut wrote:
>> On 4/22/22 16:36, Fabien Dessenne wrote:
>>> Instead of enabling/disabling the clock at each IO configuration update,
>>> just keep the clock enabled from the probe.
>>> This makes things simpler and more efficient (e.g. the time required to
>>> toggle an output IO is drastically decreased) without significantly
>>> increasing the power consumption.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> static struct irq_domain *stm32_pctrl_get_irq_domain(struct
>>> device_node *np)
>>> @@ -1575,6 +1537,10 @@ int stm32_pctl_probe(struct platform_device
>>> *pdev)
>>> ret = stm32_gpiolib_register_bank(pctl, child);
>>> if (ret) {
>>> of_node_put(child);
>>> +
>>> + for (i = 0; i < pctl->nbanks; i++)
>>> + clk_disable_unprepare(pctl->banks[i].clk);
>>> +
>>
>> There are clk_bulk_*() functions, maybe you can use those to get rid
>> of these loops ?
>
> This sounds goods, but checking more in details I see that moving to the
> 'bulk' implementation would require to move the clk information from the
> "struct stm32_gpio_bank *banks" member to its parent "struct
> stm32_pinctrl".
>
> This would make the clk device information stored in a different
> structure from the other device-related information (base address, reset
> control, ...). It's better to keep all those information together in the
> same struct.
>
> As another drawback we would loose access to 'clk' from any function
> that have 'bank' (or 'struct gpio_chip *chip') as input parameter (e.g.
> stm32_gpio_get() called from gpiolib).
>
> So I really prefer to keep the current implementation.
All right, I agree.
>> The rest looks good to me.
Reviewed-by: Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists