Re: [PATCH 1/4] clk: qcom: branch: Extend the invert logic for branch2 clocks

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

 



Hello Stephen,

Thanks for your review.

On 4/20/2023 3:07 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Taniya Das (2023-04-19 06:30:10)
From: Imran Shaik <quic_imrashai@xxxxxxxxxxx>

Add support to handle the invert logic for branch2 clocks.
Invert branch halt would indicate the clock ON when CLK_OFF
bit is '1' and OFF when CLK_OFF bit is '0'.

Signed-off-by: Imran Shaik <quic_imrashai@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c | 8 ++++++++
  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c
index f869fc6aaed6..4b24d45be771 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c
@@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ static bool clk_branch2_check_halt(const struct clk_branch *br, bool enabling)
  {
         u32 val;
         u32 mask;
+       bool invert = (br->halt_check == BRANCH_HALT_ENABLE);
mask = BRANCH_NOC_FSM_STATUS_MASK << BRANCH_NOC_FSM_STATUS_SHIFT;
         mask |= BRANCH_CLK_OFF;
@@ -56,9 +57,16 @@ static bool clk_branch2_check_halt(const struct clk_branch *br, bool enabling)
if (enabling) {
                 val &= mask;
+
+               if (invert)
+                       return (val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF) == BRANCH_CLK_OFF;
+
                 return (val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF) == 0 ||
                         val == BRANCH_NOC_FSM_STATUS_ON;

Do these clks have a NOC_FSM_STATUS bit? I think it would be better to
make a local variable for the val we're looking for, and then test for
that. We may need a mask as well, but the idea is to not duplicate the
test and return from multiple places.


Clocks which has invert status doesn't have NOC_FSM_STATUS bit.
Will remove the multiple returns in next patch.

         } else {
+               if (invert)
+                       return (val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF) == 0;
+
                 return val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF;
         }

While at it, I'd get rid of this else and de-indent the code because if
we're 'enabling' we'll return from the function regardless.


Yes, Stephen, will take care in the next patch.

--
Thanks & Regards,
Taniya Das.



[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