[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <006f6c19-d923-47c8-9890-c7431c8c1e77@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2026 13:09:13 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Mukesh Ojha <mukesh.ojha@....qualcomm.com>,
Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd
<sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>,
Taniya Das <taniya.das@....qualcomm.com>,
Linus Walleij <linusw@...nel.org>,
Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@...cinc.com>,
Taniya Das
<quic_tdas@...cinc.com>,
Raviteja Laggyshetty <quic_rlaggysh@...cinc.com>,
Jishnu Prakash <quic_jprakash@...cinc.com>,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, stable+noautosel@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8] Fix TCSR representation on SM8750
On 2/2/26 7:19 PM, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2026 at 03:57:32PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> As sparked by this thread:
>> <20260112151725.2308971-1-mukesh.ojha@....qualcomm.com>
>>
>> The current representation of TCSR is wrong.
>>
>> On platforms post and including SM8550, the TCSR had a sub-block in it,
>> containing gate clocks used for distributing the XO output to various
>> consumers. This is what we refer to as TCSR_CC upstream.
>>
>> SM8750 however, is notably different. That same set of tunables had
>> been moved to the TLMM register space. This is made worse, as the
>> sm8750-tcsrcc driver consumes the qcom,sm8750-tcsr compatible.
>>
>> This hardware change had been undone with the generation following
>> 8750.
>>
>> This series attempts to unwind that. It's difficult to merge, both for
>> bindings and functional reasons..
>>
>> I think it goes without saying this breaks backwards compatibility, but
>> it has to be done to represent TCSR at all. The patches are ordered in
>> a least-destructive order..
>>
>> I gave this a quick spin on (remote) hw, the UFS (one of the consumers)
>> still works, but more testing would be greatly appreciated.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
>
> Thanks Konrad for taking this forward, while I was also working on your
> suggestion to make tlmm a clock provider.
I was under the impression you abandoned that patch, but indeed I
should have asked first. My intention wasn't to beat you to it, but
to unblock it. Please accept my apologies.
Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists