On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 13:23, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) <quic_skakitap@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 7/11/2024 3:40 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > > On Tue, 9 Jul 2024 at 13:53, Satya Priya Kakitapalli (Temp) > > <quic_skakitap@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On 7/3/2024 3:50 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jul 02, 2024 at 09:20:43PM GMT, Satya Priya Kakitapalli wrote: > >>>> Add support for the camera clock controller for camera clients > >>>> to be able to request for camcc clocks on SM8150 platform. > >>>> > >>>> Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue<bryan.odonoghue@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Satya Priya Kakitapalli<quic_skakitap@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>> --- > >>>> drivers/clk/qcom/Kconfig | 9 + > >>>> drivers/clk/qcom/Makefile | 1 + > >>>> drivers/clk/qcom/camcc-sm8150.c | 2159 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>>> 3 files changed, 2169 insertions(+) > >>> The patch mostly LGTM, several quesitons: > >>> > >>> - There are no cam_cc_sleep_clk and no cam_cc_xo_clk_src. Why? > >> These are not required for camcc sm8150 hence not modelled. > >> > >> > >>> - Why is cam_cc_gdsc_clk not modelled in the clock framework? > >> This clock is kept enabled from probe, hence not required to be modelled > >> explicitly. > > Yes, I'm asking why it's kept up enabled from probe rather than via > > clock framework? > > > >>> - I see that most if not all RCG clocks use rcg2_shared ops instead of > >>> using simple rcg2 ops, could you please clarify that? > >> As per the HW design recommendation, RCG needs to be parked at a safe > >> clock source(XO) in the disable path, shared_ops is used to achieve the > >> same. > > Does it apply to SM8150? For example, on SM8250 RCG2s are not parked. > > > Yes, it applies to SM8150. Should the same logic be applied to other chipsets supported upstream? If this is the case, which chipsets? > >>> - RETAIN_FF_ENABLE has been used for GDSCs for sc7280, sc8280xp, sm8550, > >>> sm8650 and x1e8 platforms. Should it really be set for sm8150? If so, > >>> should it also be added to other camcc drivers (if so, for which > >>> platforms)? > >> I have rechecked this in downstream and seems it is not really needed > >> for sm8150, I'll drop in next post. > >> -- With best wishes Dmitry
