Re: Qcom clock performance votes on mainline

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

 



Quoting Stephan Gerhold (2020-09-10 09:26:10)
> Hi Stephen, Hi Rajendra,
> 
> while working on some MSM8916 things I've been staring at the downstream
> clock-gcc-8916.c [1] driver a bit. One thing that confuses me are the
> voltage/performance state votes that are made for certain clocks within
> the driver. Specifically lines like
> 
>     VDD_DIG_FMAX_MAP2(LOW, 32000000, NOMINAL, 64000000),
> 
> on certain clocks like UART, I2C or SPI. There does not seem to be
> anything equivalent in the mainline clock driver at the moment.
> 
> As far as I understand from related discussions on mailing lists [2],
> these performance votes are not supposed to be added to the clock
> driver(s), but rather as required-opps within OPP tables of all the
> consumers. Is that correct?

Yes.

> 
> As a second question, I'm wondering about one particular case:
> I've been trying to get CPR / all the CPU frequencies working on MSM8916.
> For that, I already added performance state votes for VDDMX and CPR as
> required-opps to the CPU OPP table.
> 
> After a recent discussion [3] with Viresh about where to enable power
> domains managed by the OPP core, I've been looking at all the
> performance state votes made in the downstream kernel again.
> 
> Actually, the A53 PLL used for the higher CPU frequencies also has such
> voltage/performance state votes. The downstream driver declares the
> clock like [4]:
> 
>                 .vdd_class = &vdd_sr2_pll,
>                 .fmax = (unsigned long [VDD_SR2_PLL_NUM]) {
>                         [VDD_SR2_PLL_SVS] = 1000000000,
>                         [VDD_SR2_PLL_NOM] = 1900000000,
>                 },
>                 .num_fmax = VDD_SR2_PLL_NUM,
> 
> which ends up as votes for the VDDCX power domain.
> 
> Now I'm wondering: Where should I make these votes on mainline?
> Should I add it as yet another required-opps to the CPU OPP table?

Sounds like the right approach.

> 
> It would be a bit of a special case because these votes are only done
> for the A53 PLL (which is only used for the higher CPU frequencies, not
> the lower ones)...

Can that be put into the OPP table somehow for only the high
frequencies? The OPP tables for CPUs sometimes cover the CPU PLL voltage
requirements too so it doesn't seem like a totally bad idea.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux