[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19eceba8-dfc3-40d0-a681-8c47a0248cfd@linaro.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2024 10:33:39 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
<sboyd@...nel.org>, Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>
Cc: Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Dikshita Agarwal <quic_dikshita@...cinc.com>,
Vikash Garodia <quic_vgarodia@...cinc.com>,
Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/18] clk: qcom: gcc-sm8250: Set delay for Venus CLK
resets
On 1/9/24 01:34, Bryan O'Donoghue wrote:
> On 08/01/2024 12:32, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> Some Venus resets may require more time when toggling. Describe that.
>
> May or does ?
>
> I'd prefer a strong declaration of where this value came from and why its being added.
>
> May is ambiguous.
>
> "Downstream has a 150 us delay for this. My own testing shows this to be necessary in upstream"
Alright
>
> Later commits want to add a 1000 us delay. Have all of these delays been tested ?
No, we don't support Venus on many of the newer SoCs..
>
> If not please describe where the values come.
They come from the downstream Venus driver as you mentioned.
I checked a couple different downstream SoC kernel trees and
tried to assign the values based on what I found in a kernel
for that platform. Some are fairly educated guesses.
Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists