On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 10:55:28PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 10:33:34PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 29, 2023 at 12:24:55PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 27, 2023 at 11:28:26PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote: > > > > The PCIe GDSCs are only related to the RCs. The PCIe PHYs on the other > > > > hand, are powered by VDD_MX and their specific VDDA_PHY/PLL regulators. > > > > > > No, that does not seem to be entirely correct. I added the power-domains > > > here precisely because they were needed to enable the PHYs. > > > > > > This is something I stumbled over when trying to figure out how to > > > add support for the second lane pair (i.e. four-lane mode), and I just > > > went back and confirmed that this is still the case. > > > > > > If you try to enable one of these PHYs without the corresponding GDSC > > > being enabled, you end up with: > > > > > > [ 37.709324] ------------[ cut here ]------------ > > > [ 37.718196] gcc_pcie_3b_aux_clk status stuck at 'off' > > > [ 37.718205] WARNING: CPU: 4 PID: 482 at drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c:86 clk_branch_wait+0x144/0x15c > > > > > > > Technically this patch is correct. PHYs are backed by MX domain only and not > > GDSCs. Only the controllers (PCIe, UFS, USB) are backed by GDSCs. The fact that > > you are seeing issue with PCIe Aux clock suggests me that this clock may not be > > applicable to the PHY but it needs to be enabled for working of the PHY somehow. > > I'll try to find the details on how exactly it is needed. > > > > But if I get the answer like, "This clock is also sourced to PHY directly", then > > we may need to add dual power domain for PHY (both GDSC and MX). > > > > So I answer I got from Qcom is that this clock is only applicable to the PCIe > controller and not PHYs. On some platforms, there is a separate PCIE_PHY_AUX_CLK > coming from GCC that is used during L1SS state. I think that caused confusion > while adding PHY support for followup platforms and folks just used PCIE_AUX_CLK > since they couldn't find the actual PCIE_PHY_AUX_CLK. Thanks for sorting that out. > I've prepared a series to fix this mess, but I want to know how you end up > seeing the above "clk status stuck at off" issue. Is there an actual usecase for > powering up PHY without controller or you just experimented with it? As I mentioned, I ran into this when experimenting with how to enable the "companion" PHY for four-lane support. There shouldn't be any use case for it (apart from using it to determine that the current description of the PHY resources is incomplete or incorrect). Johan
