* Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx> [181004 15:53]: > On 04/10/18 18:07, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx> [181004 14:47]: > > > On 04/10/18 17:25, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > > > It seems we should just provide a generic interface for > > > > clk_allow_autoidle() and clk_deny_autoidle()? Otherwise we'll > > > > be forever stuck with pdata callbacks it seems. > > > > > > The TI clock driver is actually providing these APIs, so that should be > > > fine. I don't think there is any use / need for pdata callbacks atm, it just > > > happens hwmod core is calling these at the moment which might have confused > > > you. > > > > Hmm OK. So do we already have some way to deny autoidle for a > > clock from ti-sysc.c driver without pdata callbacks? > > > > Suman pointed out few days ago that for a reset driver to work > > we must do clkdm_deny_idle() and clkdm_allow_idle() as the hwmod > > code does. I gues that really just boils down to doing clk deny > > idle and allow idle on the clockdomain clkctrl clock? > > Clkdm handling is done via pdata callbacks, that is a separate topic from > iclk autoidle. Iclk:s are effectively only for omap3, clkdm autoidle / > deny_idle etc. are a generic mechanism that must be used on omap4+ if you > want to prevent autoidle of certain domains/IPs. OK thanks. Tony
