Hello Sricharan, On Wednesday, June 19, 2019 4:42:11 PM CEST Sricharan R wrote: > On 6/15/2019 2:11 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > On Wednesday, June 12, 2019 11:48:48 AM CEST Sricharan R wrote: > >> Hi Christian, > >> > >> On 6/10/2019 5:45 PM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > >>> On Monday, June 10, 2019 12:09:56 PM CEST Sricharan R wrote: > >>>> Hi Christian, > >>>> > >>>> On 6/6/2019 2:11 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > >>>>> On Wed, Jun 5, 2019 at 7:16 PM Sricharan R <sricharan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Add initial device tree support for the Qualcomm IPQ6018 SoC and > >>>>>> CP01 evaluation board. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Sricharan R <sricharan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Abhishek Sahu <absahu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >>>>>> --- /dev/null > >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/ipq6018.dtsi > >>>>>> > >>>>>> + clocks { > >>>>>> + sleep_clk: sleep_clk { > >>>>>> + compatible = "fixed-clock"; > >>>>>> + clock-frequency = <32000>; > >>>>>> + #clock-cells = <0>; > >>>>>> + }; > >>>>>> + > >>>>> Recently-ish, we ran into an issue with the clock-frequency of the sleep_clk > >>>>> on older IPQ40XX (and IPQ806x) on the OpenWrt Github and ML. > >>>>> From what I know, the external "32KHz" crystals have 32768 Hz, but the QSDK > >>>>> declares them at 32000 Hz. Since you probably have access to the BOM and > >>>>> datasheets. Can you please confirm what's the real clock frequency for > >>>>> the IPQ6018. > >>>>> (And maybe also for the sleep_clk of the IPQ4018 as well?). > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> What exactly is the issue that you faced ? > >>>> Looking in to the docs, it is <32000> only on ipq6018 and ipq40xx as well. > >>> > >>> We need just a confirmation. > >>> > >>> Then again, Currently the qcom-ipq4019.dtsi is using 32768 Hz. > >>> > >>> | sleep_clk: sleep_clk { > >>> | compatible = "fixed-clock"; > >>> | clock-frequency = <32768>; > >>> | #clock-cells = <0>; > >>> | }; > >>> > >>> <https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/arch/arm/boot/dts/qcom-ipq4019.dtsi#L144> > >>> > >>> Which makes sense, because all previous Qualcomm Atheros MIPS and the > >>> future IPQ8072 SoCs have been either using or deriving a 32768 Hz clock. > >>> > >>> For example: The AR9344 derives the clock from the 25MHz/40MHz external > >>> oscillator. This is explained in "8.16.9 Derived RTC Clock (DERIVED_RTC_CLK)". > >>> Which mentions that the "32KHz" clock interval is 30.5 usec / 30.48 usec > >>> depending whenever the external reference crystal has 40MHz or 25MHz. > >>> (1/30.5usec = 32.7868852 kilohertz!). The QCA9558 datasheet says the same > >>> in "10.19.11 Derived RTC Clock". > >>> > >>> For IPQ8072: I point to the post by Sven Eckelmann on the OpenWrt ML: > >>> <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/openwrt-devel/2019-May/017131.html> > >>> "I was only able to verify for IPQ8072 that it had a 32.768 KHz > >>> sleep clock." > >>> > >>> So this is pretty much "why there is an issue", it's confusing. > >>> Is possible can you please look if there are (fixed) divisors values > >>> listed in the documentation or the registers and bits that the values > >>> are stored in? Because then we could just calculate it. > >>> > >> > >> Really sorry for the confusion. So looking little more, SLEEP_CLK is derived > >> from an external 38.4MHZ crystal, it is 32.768 KHZ. > > That's really valuable information to have. Thank you! > > > >> Somehow the clk freq plan etc seems to mention them only as .032 MHZ and misses > >> out. That means i will correct the patch for 32768 and probably the > >> ipq8074.dtsi as well > > > > Ok, there's one more issue that Paul found (at least with the IPQ4019), > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1099482 > > > > it seems that the "sleep_clk" node in the qcom-ipq4019.dtsi is not used by > > the gcc-ipq4019.c clk driver. this causes both wifi rtc_clks and the usb sleep > > clks to dangle in the /sys/kernel/debug/clk/clk_summary (from a RT-AC58U) > > > > clock enable_cnt prepare_cnt rate accuracy phase > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > xo 9 9 48000000 0 0 > > [...] > > sleep_clk 1 1 32768 0 0 > > gcc_wcss5g_rtc_clk 1 1 0 0 0 > > gcc_wcss2g_rtc_clk 1 1 0 0 0 > > gcc_usb3_sleep_clk 1 1 0 0 0 > > gcc_usb2_sleep_clk 1 1 0 0 0 > > > > with his patch the /sys/kernel/debug/clk/clk_summary looks "better" > > > > (something like this:) > > > > clock enable_cnt prepare_cnt rate accuracy phase > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > xo 9 9 48000000 0 0 > > [...] > > gcc_sleep_clk_src 5 5 32000 0 0 > > gcc_wcss5g_rtc_clk 1 1 32000 0 0 > > gcc_wcss2g_rtc_clk 1 1 32000 0 0 > > gcc_usb3_sleep_clk 1 1 32000 0 0 > > gcc_usb2_sleep_clk 1 1 32000 0 0 > > > > but judging from your comment "SLEEP_CLK is derived from an > > external 38.4MHZ crystal" the gcc_sleep_clk_src / sleep_clk > > should have xo as the parent. so the ideal output should be: > > > > clock enable_cnt prepare_cnt rate accuracy phase > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > xo 10 10 48000000 0 0 > > [...] > > gcc_sleep_clk 5 5 32768 0 0 > > gcc_wcss5g_rtc_clk 1 1 32768 0 0 > > gcc_wcss2g_rtc_clk 1 1 32768 0 0 > > gcc_usb3_sleep_clk 1 1 32768 0 0 > > gcc_usb2_sleep_clk 1 1 32768 0 0 > > > > or am I missing/skipping over something important? > > > > Sorry for the delayed response. So what i said above (32768 clk) looks > like true only for ipq8074. For ipq4019, looks like 32000. > > That means, there is still some thing unclear. I am checking for precise > information from HW team for ipq4019/8074/6018. Please hang on, will > update you asap. Thank you for looking this up! I'll definitely stick around for the final verdict. Also, I think the "xo" clk of your IPQ6018 dts should get the "always-on;" property (any maybe sleep_clk as well?). Paul discovered that the QSDK had this extra commit <https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/1089385/> (Maybe the changeid can help you look it up internally) For IPQ4019, this enables the high resolution with a 1ns resolution instead of 10ms. (echo q > /proc/sysrq-trigger can be used to check this just look for the "resolution" value before and after.) Cheers, Christian