linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 3/4] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8550 rpmh clocks

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: <1d3b7744-4e1c-b2c7-c6e4-87c256ee137a@linaro.org>
Date:   Wed, 4 Jan 2023 16:40:28 +0200
From:   Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To:     Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Mike Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/4] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8550 rpmh
 clocks

On 04/01/2023 14:45, Abel Vesa wrote:
> On 23-01-04 12:46:55, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On 04/01/2023 11:34, Abel Vesa wrote:
>>> Adds the RPMH clocks present in SM8550 SoC.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@...aro.org>
>>> Reviewed-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
>>> ---
>>>    drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    1 file changed, 36 insertions(+)
>>
>> I think the plan was to have the _PAD clock as a child node of the rpmcc. Is
>> it still the planned implementation?
> 
> Yes. Here is how the dts rpmhcc node will look like:
> 
>           rpmhcc: clock-controller {
>                   compatible = "qcom,sm8550-rpmh-clk";
>                   #clock-cells = <1>;
>                   clock-names = "xo";
>                   clocks = <&xo_board>;
> 
>                   bi_tcxo_div2: bi-tcxo-div2-clk {
>                           #clock-cells = <0>;
>                           compatible = "fixed-factor-clock";
>                           clocks = <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
>                           clock-mult = <1>;
>                           clock-div = <2>;
>                   };
> 
>                   bi_tcxo_ao_div2: bi-tcxo-div2-ao-clk {
>                           #clock-cells = <0>;
>                           compatible = "fixed-factor-clock";
>                           clocks = <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK_A>;
>                           clock-mult = <1>;
>                           clock-div = <2>;
>                   };
>           };

Does this snippet pass bindings validation?

> 
> The clock nodes will be probed on of_clk_init.

Ah, I see. of_clk_init() will initialize clocks even if the parent 
device is not fully probed. Thank you for the explanation!


-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry