linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 03/12] clk: qcom: gcc-sm6375: Unregister critical 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <7f2f738b-a2a7-43ba-b63a-bba59e76bae4@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 10:55:28 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
 Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
 <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
 Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
 Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
 linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/12] clk: qcom: gcc-sm6375: Unregister critical
 clocks

On 4.01.2024 09:35, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 03, 2024 at 02:36:01PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> Some clocks need to be always-on, but we don't really do anything
>> with them, other than calling enable() once and telling Linux they're
>> enabled.
>>
>> Unregister them to save a couple of bytes and, perhaps more
>> importantly, allow for runtime suspend of the clock controller device,
>> as CLK_IS_CRITICAL prevents the latter.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
> 
>> @@ -3886,6 +3797,11 @@ static int gcc_sm6375_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x17028); /* GCC_CAMERA_XO_CLK */
>>  	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x2b004); /* GCC_CPUSS_GNOC_CLK */
>>  	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x1702c); /* GCC_DISP_XO_CLK */
>> +	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x17008); /* GCC_CAMERA_AHB_CLK */
>> +	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x1700c); /* GCC_DISP_AHB_CLK */
>> +	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x36004); /* GCC_GPU_CFG_AHB_CLK */
>> +	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x79004); /* GCC_SYS_NOC_CPUSS_AHB_CLK */
>> +	qcom_branch_set_clk_en(regmap, 0x17004); /* GCC_VIDEO_AHB_CLK */
> 
> Shouldn't you keep the above sorted by offset or at least try to group
> them by subsystem (e.g. keep the camera clocks together)?
Guess I assumed order-of-appearance sorting was fine when I made this
patch.

I can group it by hw block, though.

Konrad