From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stübner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: add critical clock for rk3368
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 17:06:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6675833.8DAAvDYooL@diego> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150914141920.GF7002@leverpostej>
Am Montag, 14. September 2015, 15:19:21 schrieb Mark Rutland:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:20:36PM +0100, Heiko St?bner wrote:
> > Again a result of the gpio-clock-liberation the rk3368 needs the
> > pclk_pd_pmu marked as critical, to boot successfully.
> >
> > Reported-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
>
> FWIW: Tested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>
> I'm surprised that we don't describe these as critical in the DT, given
> that this isn't really an internal property of the clock controller, but
> rather what happens to be attached to it. That ship appears to have
> sailed, however.
I wouldn't necessarily think so ... what is called critical only means "don't
turn off when walking the clock-tree upwards".
The pclk_pd_pmu for example simply supplies some more clocks we don't handle
at all currently (pclk_pmu_noc, ...). That we currently choose to ignore those
[because we don't have any code nor dt-bindings to handle the components
supplied] sounds very much like an implementation-specific detail, not
something about the hardware.
I really like the concept of critical clock handling Mike is working on, which
implements some sort of hand-off and keeps so marked clocks on until a real
components picks them up.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: "mturquette@baylibre.com" <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
"sboyd@codeaurora.org" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
"linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: add critical clock for rk3368
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 17:06:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6675833.8DAAvDYooL@diego> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150914141920.GF7002@leverpostej>
Am Montag, 14. September 2015, 15:19:21 schrieb Mark Rutland:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:20:36PM +0100, Heiko St=FCbner wrote:
> > Again a result of the gpio-clock-liberation the rk3368 needs the
> > pclk_pd_pmu marked as critical, to boot successfully.
> >=20
> > Reported-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
>=20
> FWIW: Tested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>=20
> I'm surprised that we don't describe these as critical in the DT, giv=
en
> that this isn't really an internal property of the clock controller, =
but
> rather what happens to be attached to it. That ship appears to have
> sailed, however.
I wouldn't necessarily think so ... what is called critical only means =
"don't=20
turn off when walking the clock-tree upwards".
The pclk_pd_pmu for example simply supplies some more clocks we don't h=
andle=20
at all currently (pclk_pmu_noc, ...). That we currently choose to ignor=
e those=20
[because we don't have any code nor dt-bindings to handle the component=
s=20
supplied] sounds very much like an implementation-specific detail, not=20=
something about the hardware.
I really like the concept of critical clock handling Mike is working on=
, which=20
implements some sort of hand-off and keeps so marked clocks on until a =
real=20
components picks them up.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: "mturquette@baylibre.com" <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
"sboyd@codeaurora.org" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
"linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: rockchip: add critical clock for rk3368
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 17:06:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6675833.8DAAvDYooL@diego> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150914141920.GF7002@leverpostej>
Am Montag, 14. September 2015, 15:19:21 schrieb Mark Rutland:
> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 12:20:36PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > Again a result of the gpio-clock-liberation the rk3368 needs the
> > pclk_pd_pmu marked as critical, to boot successfully.
> >
> > Reported-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
>
> FWIW: Tested-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
>
> I'm surprised that we don't describe these as critical in the DT, given
> that this isn't really an internal property of the clock controller, but
> rather what happens to be attached to it. That ship appears to have
> sailed, however.
I wouldn't necessarily think so ... what is called critical only means "don't
turn off when walking the clock-tree upwards".
The pclk_pd_pmu for example simply supplies some more clocks we don't handle
at all currently (pclk_pmu_noc, ...). That we currently choose to ignore those
[because we don't have any code nor dt-bindings to handle the components
supplied] sounds very much like an implementation-specific detail, not
something about the hardware.
I really like the concept of critical clock handling Mike is working on, which
implements some sort of hand-off and keeps so marked clocks on until a real
components picks them up.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-09-14 15:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-09-13 11:20 [PATCH] clk: rockchip: add critical clock for rk3368 Heiko Stübner
2015-09-13 11:20 ` Heiko Stübner
2015-09-13 11:20 ` Heiko Stübner
2015-09-14 14:19 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-14 14:19 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-14 14:19 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-14 15:06 ` Heiko Stübner [this message]
2015-09-14 15:06 ` Heiko Stübner
2015-09-14 15:06 ` Heiko Stübner
2015-09-14 15:19 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-14 15:19 ` Mark Rutland
2015-09-14 15:24 ` Heiko Stübner
2015-09-14 15:24 ` Heiko Stübner
2015-09-14 15:24 ` Heiko Stübner
2015-09-14 19:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-09-14 19:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-09-14 19:49 ` Stephen Boyd
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6675833.8DAAvDYooL@diego \
--to=heiko@sntech.de \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.