[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240903090945.rqqqrchwadustegn@vireshk-i7>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 14:39:45 +0530
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
Cc: rafael@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>, Bryan Brattlof <bb@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq: ti-cpufreq: Use socinfo to get revision in AM62
family
On 02-09-24, 14:51, Dhruva Gole wrote:
> In the AM62x, AM62Ax, and AM62Px devices, we already have the revision
> info within the k3-socinfo driver. Hence, re-use this information from
> there instead of re using the offset for 2 drivers trying to get the
> same information ie. revision.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dhruva Gole <d-gole@...com>
> ---
>
> Hi,
> This patch depends on [1] and if someone wants to test, can use my
> github branch [2]. I was able to test this on SK-AM625 [3].
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20240828131915.3198081-1-nm@ti.com/
> [2] https://github.com/DhruvaG2000/v-linux/tree/ti-cpufreq-revision-fix
> [3] https://gist.github.com/DhruvaG2000/d0c360b0bd7e43d0fd28cfe3eab941d2
>
> Cc: Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
> Cc: Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>
> Cc: Vibhore Vardhan <vibhore@...com>
> Cc: Bryan Brattlof <bb@...com>
>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> index 804329e81eb8..ba621ce1cdda 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> @@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
> #include <linux/pm_opp.h>
> #include <linux/regmap.h>
> #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/sys_soc.h>
>
> #define REVISION_MASK 0xF
> #define REVISION_SHIFT 28
> @@ -303,6 +304,13 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am3517_soc_data = {
> .quirks = TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_MAY_BE_MISSING,
> };
>
> +static const struct soc_device_attribute k3_cpufreq_soc[] = {
> + { .family = "AM62X", .revision = "SR1.0" },
> + { .family = "AM62AX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
> + { .family = "AM62PX", .revision = "SR1.0" },
> + { /* sentinel */ }
> +};
> +
> static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am625_soc_data = {
> .efuse_xlate = am625_efuse_xlate,
> .efuse_offset = 0x0018,
> @@ -384,6 +392,16 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_get_rev(struct ti_cpufreq_data *opp_data,
> struct device *dev = opp_data->cpu_dev;
> u32 revision;
> int ret;
> + if (soc_device_match(k3_cpufreq_soc)) {
> + /*
> + * Since the SR is 1.0, hard code the revision_value as
> + * 0x1 here. This way we avoid re using the same register
> + * that is giving us required information inside socinfo
> + * anyway.
> + */
> + *revision_value = 0x1;
> + goto done;
> + }
>
> ret = regmap_read(opp_data->syscon, opp_data->soc_data->rev_offset,
> &revision);
> @@ -406,6 +424,7 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_get_rev(struct ti_cpufreq_data *opp_data,
>
> *revision_value = BIT((revision >> REVISION_SHIFT) & REVISION_MASK);
>
> +done:
> return 0;
> }
Applied. Thanks.
--
viresh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists