On 11/03/2023 14:01, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
Limit the number of bus_clocks to 2 (which is the maximum that SMD
RPM interconnect supports anyway) and handle non-scaling clocks
separately. Update MSM8996 and SDM660 drivers to make sure they do
not regress with this change.
This unfortunately has to be done in one patch to prevent either
compile errors or broken bisect.
Can we determine somehow if the intf clocks are required for the whole
NoC or just for a single node? I don't think that clocks like a0noc_ufs
are requiered to be up for the whole aggre_noc. Instead they probably
have to be enabled only when UFS makes use of the NoC (in other words
when is has voted for the bandwidth).
Its probably worthwhile experimenting to see if the *ufs*_clk can/should
be added to the UFS device list of clocks.
I hadn't realised we were talking about enabling the intf clocks always
but, actually that is what we are talking about isn't it ?
It seems pretty unlikely that other devices would depend on clocks named
*ufs*
OTOH "clk-aggre2-noc-clk-no-rate" may be used across different nodes,
seems like a pretty generic name, though still suspicious it is bundled
with UFS, likely it is only required for UFS ?!?
Konrad can you try:
1. Moving the intf_clks/QoS clocks be contained to UFS alone ?
2. If that doesn't work just the *ufs* clocks be put there with
2a. "clk-aggre2-noc-clk-no-rate" alone added to the intf_clk list
It seems wrong to be enabling ufs related NoC clocks unless we are
actually switching on UFS.
---
bod
