Re: [PATCH v7 1/2] dt-bindings: cpufreq: Introduce QCOM CPUFREQ Firmware bindings

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 8/8/2018 12:54 AM, skannan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 2018-08-07 04:12, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:54:24PM -0700, skannan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 2018-08-03 16:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>Quoting Taniya Das (2018-07-24 03:42:49)
>>diff --git
>>a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
>>b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
>>new file mode 100644
>>index 0000000..22d4355
>>--- /dev/null
>>+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/cpufreq/cpufreq-qcom-hw.txt
>>@@ -0,0 +1,172 @@
>[...]
>>+
>>+               CPU7: cpu@700 {
>>+                       device_type = "cpu";
>>+                       compatible = "qcom,kryo385";
>>+                       reg = <0x0 0x700>;
>>+                       enable-method = "psci";
>>+                       next-level-cache = <&L2_700>;
>>+                       qcom,freq-domain = <&freq_domain_table1>;
>>+                       L2_700: l2-cache {
>>+                               compatible = "cache";
>>+                               next-level-cache = <&L3_0>;
>>+                       };
>>+               };
>>+       };
>>+
>>+       qcom,cpufreq-hw {
>>+               compatible = "qcom,cpufreq-hw";
>>+
>>+               clocks = <&rpmhcc RPMH_CXO_CLK>;
>>+               clock-names = "xo";
>>+
>>+               #address-cells = <2>;
>>+               #size-cells = <2>;
>>+               ranges;
>>+               freq_domain_table0: freq_table0 {
>>+                       reg = <0 0x17d43000 0 0x1400>;
>>+               };
>>+
>>+               freq_domain_table1: freq_table1 {
>>+                       reg = <0 0x17d45800 0 0x1400>;
>>+               };
>
>Sorry, this is just not proper DT design. The whole node should have a
>reg property, and it should contain two (or three if we're handling the
>L3 clk domain?) different offsets for the different power clusters. The
>problem seems to still be that we don't have a way to map the CPUs to
>the clk domains they're in provided by this hardware block. Making
>subnodes is not the solution.

The problem is mapping clock domains to logical CPUs that CPUfreq uses. The
physical CPU to logical CPU mapping can be changed by the kernel (even
through DT if I'm not mistaken). So we need to have a way to tell in DT
which physical CPUs are connected to which CPU freq clock domain.


How about passing CPU freq clock domain id as along with phandle in
qcom,freq-domain ?

Now sure what you mean here. There's no such this as CPUfreq clock domain id. It has policies that are made up of logical CPU numbers. Logical CPU is not something that you can fix in DT.

-Saravana

Sudeep,

Earlier the design was the freq_domain would take the CPU phandles

freq_domain:
  cpus = <&cpu0 &cpu1....>;

--
QUALCOMM INDIA, on behalf of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member
of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation.

--
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Device Tree Compilter]     [Device Tree Spec]     [Linux Driver Backports]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux PCI Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]     [XFree86]     [Yosemite Backpacking]


  Powered by Linux