On Tue, Jul 27 2021 at 02:46:39 PM -0700, Stephen Boyd
<sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Quoting Martin Botka (2021-06-29 03:26:23)
diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c
b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c
index 8200c26b968c..51458f740ba0 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-smd-rpm.c
@@ -1059,6 +1059,61 @@ static const struct rpm_smd_clk_desc
rpm_clk_sdm660 = {
.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(sdm660_clks),
};
+/* SM6125 */
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM_BRANCH(sm6125, bi_tcxo, bi_tcxo_ao,
+ QCOM_SMD_RPM_MISC_CLK, 0,
19200000);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, cnoc_clk, cnoc_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_BUS_CLK, 1);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, bimc_clk, bimc_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_MEM_CLK, 0);
Can we use msm8916_bimc_clk?
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, snoc_clk, snoc_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_BUS_CLK, 2);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM_BRANCH(sm6125, qdss_clk, qdss_a_clk,
+ QCOM_SMD_RPM_MISC_CLK, 1,
19200000);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, ce1_clk, ce1_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_CE_CLK, 0);
Can we use msm8992_ce1_clk?
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, ipa_clk, ipa_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_IPA_CLK, 0);
Can we use msm8976_ipa_clk?
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, qup_clk, qup_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_QUP_CLK, 0);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, mmnrt_clk, mmnrt_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_MMAXI_CLK, 0);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, mmrt_clk, mmrt_a_clk,
QCOM_SMD_RPM_MMAXI_CLK, 1);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, snoc_periph_clk, snoc_periph_a_clk,
+
QCOM_SMD_RPM_BUS_CLK, 0);
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM(sm6125, snoc_lpass_clk, snoc_lpass_a_clk,
+
QCOM_SMD_RPM_BUS_CLK, 5);
+
+/* SMD_XO_BUFFER */
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM_XO_BUFFER(sm6125, ln_bb_clk1, ln_bb_clk1_a, 1);
msm8916?
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM_XO_BUFFER(sm6125, ln_bb_clk2, ln_bb_clk2_a, 2);
msm8916?
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM_XO_BUFFER(sm6125, ln_bb_clk3, ln_bb_clk3_a, 3);
sdm660?
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM_XO_BUFFER(sm6125, rf_clk1, rf_clk1_a, 4);
msm8916?
+DEFINE_CLK_SMD_RPM_XO_BUFFER(sm6125, rf_clk2, rf_clk2_a, 5);
msm8916?
Will do to all.
+
+static struct clk_smd_rpm *sm6125_clks[] = {
+ [RPM_SMD_XO_CLK_SRC] = &sm6125_bi_tcxo,
+ [RPM_SMD_XO_A_CLK_SRC] = &sm6125_bi_tcxo_ao,
+ [RPM_SMD_SNOC_CLK] = &sm6125_snoc_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_SNOC_A_CLK] = &sm6125_snoc_a_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_BIMC_CLK] = &sm6125_bimc_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_BIMC_A_CLK] = &sm6125_bimc_a_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_QDSS_CLK] = &sm6125_qdss_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_QDSS_A_CLK] = &sm6125_qdss_a_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_RF_CLK1] = &sm6125_rf_clk1,
+ [RPM_SMD_RF_CLK1_A] = &sm6125_rf_clk1_a,
+ [RPM_SMD_RF_CLK2] = &sm6125_rf_clk2,
+ [RPM_SMD_RF_CLK2_A] = &sm6125_rf_clk2_a,
+ [RPM_SMD_LN_BB_CLK1] = &sm6125_ln_bb_clk1,
+ [RPM_SMD_LN_BB_CLK1_A] = &sm6125_ln_bb_clk1_a,
+ [RPM_SMD_LN_BB_CLK2] = &sm6125_ln_bb_clk2,
+ [RPM_SMD_LN_BB_CLK2_A] = &sm6125_ln_bb_clk2_a,
+ [RPM_SMD_LN_BB_CLK3] = &sm6125_ln_bb_clk3,
+ [RPM_SMD_LN_BB_CLK3_A] = &sm6125_ln_bb_clk3_a,
+ [RPM_SMD_CNOC_CLK] = &sm6125_cnoc_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_CNOC_A_CLK] = &sm6125_cnoc_a_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_CE1_CLK] = &sm6125_ce1_clk,
+ [RPM_SMD_CE1_A_CLK] = &sm6125_ce1_a_clk,
+};
+
+static const struct rpm_smd_clk_desc rpm_clk_sm6125 = {
+ .clks = sm6125_clks,
+ .num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(sm6125_clks),
+};
+
static const struct of_device_id rpm_smd_clk_match_table[] = {
{ .compatible = "qcom,rpmcc-msm8916", .data =
&rpm_clk_msm8916 },
{ .compatible = "qcom,rpmcc-msm8936", .data =
&rpm_clk_msm8936 },
diff --git a/include/linux/soc/qcom/smd-rpm.h
b/include/linux/soc/qcom/smd-rpm.h
index f2645ec52520..b737d7e456e4 100644
--- a/include/linux/soc/qcom/smd-rpm.h
+++ b/include/linux/soc/qcom/smd-rpm.h
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ struct qcom_smd_rpm;
#define QCOM_SMD_RPM_NCPA 0x6170636E
#define QCOM_SMD_RPM_NCPB 0x6270636E
#define QCOM_SMD_RPM_OCMEM_PWR 0x706d636f
+#define QCOM_SMD_RPM_QUP_CLK 0x00707571
#define QCOM_SMD_RPM_QPIC_CLK 0x63697071
#define QCOM_SMD_RPM_SMPA 0x61706d73
#define QCOM_SMD_RPM_SMPB 0x62706d73
Two patches are adding this in different places.
Im aware. I will argue tho that adding it
in alphabetical order is the correct way to go here.
Thats how the rest is done except the last 4 defines
in that block which probably should be moved into
their alphabetical order as well
(They do not follow address ordering).
