Re: [PATCHv4 03/33] CLK: OMAP4: Add DPLL clock support

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

 



On 07/30/2013 07:23 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
This patch probably was submitted in the wrong sequence - fails build
and few other issues below.

Yeah, I'll double check the build sequence for these.


On 07/23/2013 02:19 AM, Tero Kristo wrote:
The OMAP clock driver now supports DPLL clock type. This patch also
adds support for DT DPLL nodes.

Then why is $subject specific to OMAP4? is that because of
of_omap4_dpll_setup?

The driver only supports omap4 dpll type at this point, omap3 dplls require some modifications on top of this, and are provided later in the series.



Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx>
---
  drivers/clk/omap/Makefile |    2 +-
  drivers/clk/omap/clk.c    |    1 +
  drivers/clk/omap/dpll.c   |  295
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Device Tree Binding documentation?

Didn't bother writing those yet as I haven't received too much feedback whether this approach is acceptable or not.


  3 files changed, 297 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
  create mode 100644 drivers/clk/omap/dpll.c

diff --git a/drivers/clk/omap/Makefile b/drivers/clk/omap/Makefile
index 8195931..4cad480 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/omap/Makefile
+++ b/drivers/clk/omap/Makefile
@@ -1 +1 @@
-obj-y                    += clk.o
+obj-y                    += clk.o dpll.o
diff --git a/drivers/clk/omap/clk.c b/drivers/clk/omap/clk.c
index 4bf1929..1dafdaa 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/omap/clk.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/omap/clk.c
@@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_match[] = {
          .data = of_fixed_factor_clk_setup, },
      {.compatible = "divider-clock", .data = of_divider_clk_setup, },
      {.compatible = "gate-clock", .data = of_gate_clk_setup, },
+    {.compatible = "ti,omap4-dpll-clock", .data =
of_omap4_dpll_setup, },
      {},
  };
you would not need this if you did just of_clk_init(NULL); ?

Why not? And I think we still need to do this.


Further, at this patch, build fails with:
drivers/clk/omap/clk.c:31:55: error: undefined identifier
'of_omap4_dpll_setup'
drivers/clk/omap/clk.c:31:48: error: ‘of_omap4_dpll_setup’ undeclared
here (not in a function)

which makes sense since we did not export the function.

Yea seems like wrong ordering of patches, sorry about that. >.<


diff --git a/drivers/clk/omap/dpll.c b/drivers/clk/omap/dpll.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..66e82be
--- /dev/null
+++ b/drivers/clk/omap/dpll.c
@@ -0,0 +1,295 @@
+/*
+ * OMAP DPLL clock support
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2013 Texas Instruments, Inc.
+ *
+ * Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx>
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
+ * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 2 as
+ * published by the Free Software Foundation.
+ *
+ * This program is distributed "as is" WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY of any
+ * kind, whether express or implied; without even the implied warranty
+ * of MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ */
+
+#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
+#include <linux/module.h>
+#include <linux/slab.h>
+#include <linux/io.h>
+#include <linux/err.h>
+#include <linux/string.h>
+#include <linux/log2.h>
+#include <linux/of.h>
+#include <linux/of_address.h>
after a quick check, are all these required?

Seems like some might not be needed, I'll double check this.


+#include <linux/clk/omap.h>

why?

Need dpll_data definition for example.


+
+static const struct clk_ops dpll_m4xen_ck_ops = {
+    .enable        = &omap3_noncore_dpll_enable,
+    .disable    = &omap3_noncore_dpll_disable,
+    .recalc_rate    = &omap4_dpll_regm4xen_recalc,
+    .round_rate    = &omap4_dpll_regm4xen_round_rate,
+    .set_rate    = &omap3_noncore_dpll_set_rate,
+    .get_parent    = &omap2_init_dpll_parent,
+};
+
+static const struct clk_ops dpll_core_ck_ops = {
+    .recalc_rate    = &omap3_dpll_recalc,
+    .get_parent    = &omap2_init_dpll_parent,
+};
+
+static const struct clk_ops dpll_ck_ops = {
+    .enable        = &omap3_noncore_dpll_enable,
+    .disable    = &omap3_noncore_dpll_disable,
+    .recalc_rate    = &omap3_dpll_recalc,
+    .round_rate    = &omap2_dpll_round_rate,
+    .set_rate    = &omap3_noncore_dpll_set_rate,
+    .get_parent    = &omap2_init_dpll_parent,
+    .init        = &omap2_init_clk_clkdm,
+};
+
+static const struct clk_ops dpll_x2_ck_ops = {
+    .recalc_rate    = &omap3_clkoutx2_recalc,
+};

none of these are defined at this stage of the patch, generates a huge
build error for dpll.c
http://pastebin.com/GJucv1A5

Yea, wrong ordering, linux/clk/omap.h is not up to date. I'll fix this and rest of the similar issues.

+
+struct clk *omap_clk_register_dpll(struct device *dev, const char *name,
+        const char **parent_names, int num_parents, unsigned long flags,
+        struct dpll_data *dpll_data, const char *clkdm_name,
+        const struct clk_ops *ops)

why should this be public?

Currently does not need to be, but someone could in theory build up cclockXxxx_data.c file and use these calls from there. Kind of legacy support, see some of the basic clk types. I guess I can add static to this, and remove some of the params along.


+{
+    struct clk *clk;
+    struct clk_init_data init;

init = { 0 };  just to future proof?

Good idea, i'll add this.


+    struct clk_hw_omap *clk_hw;

does not exist yet in generic header?

Yea.


I am assuming you do not do parameter check as you expect clk_register
to do the same?

True, so I'll change the above function to static.


+
+    /* allocate the divider */
+    clk_hw = kzalloc(sizeof(struct clk_hw_omap), GFP_KERNEL);
checkpatch complained:
CHECK: Prefer kzalloc(sizeof(*clk_hw)...) over kzalloc(sizeof(struct
clk_hw_omap)...)

Hmm, I didn't get this with checkpatch. Some special option/version you use? I still see both types of sizeof used in the kernel.


or given we have dev, devm_kzalloc?

Actually we don't have dev, check how this is called from below.

+    if (!clk_hw) {
+        pr_err("%s: could not allocate clk_hw_omap\n", __func__);
+        return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+    }
+
+    clk_hw->dpll_data = dpll_data;
+    clk_hw->ops = &clkhwops_omap3_dpll;
+    clk_hw->clkdm_name = clkdm_name;
+    clk_hw->hw.init = &init;
+
+    init.name = name;
+    init.ops = ops;
+    init.flags = flags;
+    init.parent_names = parent_names;
+    init.num_parents = num_parents;
+
+    /* register the clock */
+    clk = clk_register(dev, &clk_hw->hw);
+
+    if (IS_ERR(clk))
+        kfree(clk_hw);
+    else
+        omap2_init_clk_hw_omap_clocks(clk);
what if init fails? and it is in mach-omap2 at this point in time?

Yea, this just calls the autoidle init part under mach-omap2.


+
+    return clk;
+}
+
+struct clk *omap_clk_register_dpll_x2(struct device *dev, const char
*name,
+        const char *parent_name, void __iomem *reg,
+        const struct clk_ops *ops)

same question here as well

Yea, can change to static I think.


+{
+    struct clk *clk;
+    struct clk_init_data init;
+    struct clk_hw_omap *clk_hw;
+
+    if (!parent_name) {
+        pr_err("%s: dpll_x2 must have parent\n", __func__);
+        return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+    }
+
+    clk_hw = kzalloc(sizeof(struct clk_hw_omap), GFP_KERNEL);
checkpatch complained:
CHECK: Prefer kzalloc(sizeof(*clk_hw)...) over kzalloc(sizeof(struct
clk_hw_omap)...)

or devm_kzalloc?

Same as above.


+    if (!clk_hw) {
+        pr_err("%s: could not allocate clk_hw_omap\n", __func__);
+        return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+    }
+
+    clk_hw->ops = &clkhwops_omap4_dpllmx;
+    clk_hw->clksel_reg = reg;
+    clk_hw->hw.init = &init;
+
+    init.name = name;
+    init.ops = ops;
+    init.parent_names = &parent_name;
+    init.num_parents = 1;
+
+    /* register the clock */
+    clk = clk_register(dev, &clk_hw->hw);
+
+    if (IS_ERR(clk))
+        kfree(clk_hw);
+    else
+        omap2_init_clk_hw_omap_clocks(clk);
+
+    return clk;
+}
this vaguely sounds like a replica of omap_clk_register_dpll with
num_parents and clk_hw->ops different. why not merge the two?

Some of the params are different but yes, I'll see if I can merge the two.


+
+#ifdef CONFIG_OF

why not build the entire thing *iff* CONFIG_OF (Makefile/Kconfig dep)?
that way, we can drop this #ifdef stuff from drivers that dont need to
have dual support.

Yea, I guess I can do this.


+
+/**
+ * of_omap_dpll_setup() - Setup function for OMAP DPLL clocks

node and ops not documented.

I'll add some beef here.


+ */
+static void __init of_omap_dpll_setup(struct device_node *node,
+                    const struct clk_ops *ops)
+{
+    struct clk *clk;
+    const char *clk_name = node->name;
+    int num_parents;
+    const char **parent_names;
+    const char *clkdm_name = NULL;
+    struct of_phandle_args clkspec;
+    u8 dpll_flags = 0;
+    struct dpll_data *dd;
+    u32 idlest_mask = 0x1;
+    u32 enable_mask = 0x7;
+    u32 autoidle_mask = 0x7;
+    u32 mult_mask = 0x7ff << 8;
+    u32 div1_mask = 0x7f;
+    u32 max_multiplier = 2047;
+    u32 max_divider = 128;
+    u32 min_divider = 1;
+    int i;
+
+    dd = kzalloc(sizeof(struct dpll_data), GFP_KERNEL);
kzalloc sizeof(*dd) ?

See above.


+    if (!dd) {
+        pr_err("%s: could not allocate dpll_data\n", __func__);
+        return;
+    }
+
+    of_property_read_string(node, "clock-output-names", &clk_name);
+
+    num_parents = of_clk_get_parent_count(node);
+    if (num_parents < 1) {
+        pr_err("%s: omap dpll %s must have parent(s)\n",
+            __func__, node->name);

checkpatch complained:
CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
#212: FILE: drivers/clk/omap/dpll.c:171:
After applying the patch, I think you should make __func__ aligned with
" and not %

Again, what version of checkpatch you use? Or what flags?


+        goto cleanup;
+    }
+
+    parent_names = kzalloc(sizeof(char *) * num_parents, GFP_KERNEL);
+
+    for (i = 0; i < num_parents; i++)
+        parent_names[i] = of_clk_get_parent_name(node, i);
+
+    of_property_read_u32(node, "ti,idlest-mask", &idlest_mask);
+
+    of_property_read_u32(node, "ti,enable-mask", &enable_mask);
+
+    of_property_read_u32(node, "ti,autoidle-mask", &autoidle_mask);

are these going to be different? or can we catch with compatible flag?

For example, omap3 dpll4:

dpll4_ck: dpll4_ck@48004d00 {
        ti,autoidle-mask = <0x38>;
        ti,idlest-mask = <0x2>;
        ti,enable-mask = <0x70000>;
};

It seems that currently we can catch all cases with the ti,dpll-peripheral flag. I'll modify the code accordingly.



+
+    clkspec.np = of_parse_phandle(node, "ti,clk-ref", 0);
+    dd->clk_ref = of_clk_get_from_provider(&clkspec);
+    if (!dd->clk_ref) {
+        pr_err("%s: ti,clk-ref for %s not found\n", __func__,
+            clk_name);

CHECK: Alignment should match open parenthesis
#231: FILE: drivers/clk/omap/dpll.c:190:
similar issue here.

+        goto cleanup;
+    }
+
+    clkspec.np = of_parse_phandle(node, "ti,clk-bypass", 0);
+    dd->clk_bypass = of_clk_get_from_provider(&clkspec);
+    if (!dd->clk_bypass) {
+        pr_err("%s: ti,clk-bypass for %s not found\n", __func__,
+            clk_name);

here as well

+        goto cleanup;
+    }
+
+    of_property_read_string(node, "ti,clkdm-name", &clkdm_name);
+
+    dd->control_reg = of_iomap(node, 0);
+    dd->idlest_reg = of_iomap(node, 1);
+    dd->autoidle_reg = of_iomap(node, 2);
+    dd->mult_div1_reg = of_iomap(node, 3);

if dts has errors, should we not verify mandatory parameters?

+
+    dd->idlest_mask = idlest_mask;
+    dd->enable_mask = enable_mask;
+    dd->autoidle_mask = autoidle_mask;
+
+    dd->modes = 0xa0;

what is 0xa0?

Magic mode. :) I'll copy paste a macro for this.


+
+    if (of_property_read_bool(node, "ti,dpll-j-type")) {
+        dd->sddiv_mask = 0xff000000;
+        mult_mask = 0xfff << 8;
+        div1_mask = 0xff;
+        max_multiplier = 4095;
+        max_divider = 256;
+    }
+
+    if (of_property_read_bool(node, "ti,dpll-regm4xen")) {
I think we need bindings to understand this better.

Or documentation you mean?


+        dd->m4xen_mask = 0x800;
+        dd->lpmode_mask = 1 << 10;
+    }
+
+    dd->mult_mask = mult_mask;
+    dd->div1_mask = div1_mask;
+    dd->max_multiplier = max_multiplier;
+    dd->max_divider = max_divider;
+    dd->min_divider = min_divider;
+
+    clk = omap_clk_register_dpll(NULL, clk_name, parent_names,
+                num_parents, dpll_flags, dd,
+                clkdm_name, ops);
+
+    if (!IS_ERR(clk))
+        of_clk_add_provider(node, of_clk_src_simple_get, clk);
error check?

This is not done with other drivers either. Would require clk_unregister use to cleanup the above register call which is currently unavailable. I could add an error trace for this though.

+    return;
+
+cleanup:

kfree(parent_names) ?

Hmm yea.


+    kfree(dd);
+    return;
+}
+
+static void __init of_omap_dpll_x2_setup(struct device_node *node)
+{
+    struct clk *clk;
+    const char *clk_name = node->name;
+    void __iomem *reg;
+    const char *parent_name;
+
+    of_property_read_string(node, "clock-output-names", &clk_name);
+
+    parent_name = of_clk_get_parent_name(node, 0);
+
+    reg = of_iomap(node, 0);

if dts has errors, should we not verify mandatory parameters?

You mean checking the validity of this pointer? It seems of_iomap does something strange when it fails, e.g. when passed a 0x0 from DT. You can see what I do in a later patch for adding am335x support for DPLLs.


+
+    clk = omap_clk_register_dpll_x2(NULL, clk_name, parent_name,
+                reg, &dpll_x2_ck_ops);
+
+    if (!IS_ERR(clk))
+        of_clk_add_provider(node, of_clk_src_simple_get, clk);
error check?

gentle request - in this setup function we dont see a return of error
value (which makes sense), but more importantly - log saying that node
was not setup

Yea, I can add error prints.


+}
+
+__init void of_omap3_dpll_setup(struct device_node *node)

^^ void __init? further, you could make this static.

Ok.


+{
+    /* XXX: to be done */
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_omap3_dpll_setup);

you can drop the export if you use of_clk_init(NULL);

Same comment as earlier.


+CLK_OF_DECLARE(omap3_dpll_clock, "ti,omap3-dpll-clock",
of_omap3_dpll_setup);
+
+__init void of_omap4_dpll_setup(struct device_node *node)

^^ void __init? further, you could make this static.

Ok.


+{
+    const struct clk_ops *ops;
+
+    ops = &dpll_ck_ops;
+
+    if (of_property_read_bool(node, "ti,dpll-regm4xen"))
+        ops = &dpll_m4xen_ck_ops;
+
+    if (of_property_read_bool(node, "ti,dpll-core"))
+        ops = &dpll_core_ck_ops;
+
+    if (of_property_read_bool(node, "ti,dpll-clk-x2")) {
+        of_omap_dpll_x2_setup(node);
+        return;
+    }
+
+    of_omap_dpll_setup(node, ops);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(of_omap4_dpll_setup);

you can drop the export if you use of_clk_init(NULL);

Hmm no?

Actually dug this further, I think the init setup is slightly wrong at the moment, we should not do CLK_OF_DECLARE at all within the omap specific clock drivers, but instead just use the match table from clk.c. I'll change it like so.


+CLK_OF_DECLARE(omap4_dpll_clock, "ti,omap4-dpll-clock",
of_omap4_dpll_setup);

So, for example this should be removed. We don't want to support this clock type on non-omap platforms just to avoid problems.

+#endif


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Arm (vger)]     [ARM Kernel]     [ARM MSM]     [Linux Tegra]     [Linux WPAN Networking]     [Linux Wireless Networking]     [Maemo Users]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Trails]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux