[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4skm6zab2xf2e4qgh4l45xzhuncmls7yfw4y77yufb7pvs2zew@rmzcgb6ozamf>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 12:25:01 +0300
From: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>
To: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, Taniya Das <quic_tdas@...cinc.com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] clk: qcom: dispcc-sm8650: Park RCG's clk source
at XO during disable
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 10:05:50AM GMT, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> The RCG's clk src has to be parked at XO while disabling as per the
> HW recommendation, hence use clk_rcg2_shared_ops to achieve the same.
>
> It also changes dptx1_aux_clk_src to use the correct ops instead of
> clk_dp_ops.
>
> Fixes: 9e939f008338 ("clk: qcom: add the SM8650 Display Clock Controller driver")
> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>
> ---
> drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8650.c | 14 +++++++-------
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8650.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8650.c
> index c9d2751f5cb8..360b80377ed6 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8650.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/dispcc-sm8650.c
> @@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_dptx0_aux_clk_src = {
> .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_0,
> .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_0),
> .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> - .ops = &clk_rcg2_ops,
> + .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> },
> };
>
> @@ -398,7 +398,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_dptx1_aux_clk_src = {
> .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_0,
> .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_0),
> .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> - .ops = &clk_dp_ops,
> + .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> },
> };
>
> @@ -457,7 +457,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_dptx2_aux_clk_src = {
> .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_0,
> .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_0),
> .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> - .ops = &clk_rcg2_ops,
> + .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> },
> };
>
> @@ -516,7 +516,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_dptx3_aux_clk_src = {
> .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_0,
> .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_0),
> .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> - .ops = &clk_rcg2_ops,
> + .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> },
> };
The only parent for these three clocks is the DT_BI_TCXO. Is this really
going to work as expected? Also what's the point of parking the
TCXO-sourced clocks?
>
> @@ -560,7 +560,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_esc0_clk_src = {
> .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_5,
> .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_5),
> .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> - .ops = &clk_rcg2_ops,
> + .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> },
> };
>
> @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_esc1_clk_src = {
> .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_5,
> .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_5),
> .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> - .ops = &clk_rcg2_ops,
> + .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> },
> };
>
> @@ -647,7 +647,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 disp_cc_mdss_vsync_clk_src = {
> .parent_data = disp_cc_parent_data_0,
> .num_parents = ARRAY_SIZE(disp_cc_parent_data_0),
> .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> - .ops = &clk_rcg2_ops,
> + .ops = &clk_rcg2_shared_ops,
> },
> };
>
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
--
With best wishes
Dmitry
Powered by blists - more mailing lists