On 08/14/2013 09:20 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > On Wednesday 14 August 2013 07:43 PM, Mark Rutland wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 03:05:25PM +0100, Rajendra Nayak wrote: >>> On Wednesday 14 August 2013 07:28 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>>> On 08/14/2013 08:49 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: >>>>> [Adding Mike Turquette and dt maintainers] >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 02:39:44PM +0100, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>>>>> On 08/14/2013 08:20 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday 14 August 2013 06:18 PM, Nishanth Menon wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi Rajendra, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 1:24 AM, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@xxxxxx> wrote: >>>>>>>> [..] >>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c >>>>>>>>> index 12fa589..e5c804b 100644 >>>>>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c >>>>>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c >>>>>>>>> @@ -805,6 +805,65 @@ static int _init_interface_clks(struct omap_hwmod *oh) >>>>>>>>> return ret; >>>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> +static const char **_parse_opt_clks_dt(struct omap_hwmod *oh, >>>>>>>>> + struct device_node *np, >>>>>>>>> + int *opt_clks_cnt) >>>>>>>>> +{ >>>>>>>>> + int i, clks_cnt; >>>>>>>>> + const char *clk_name; >>>>>>>>> + const char **opt_clk_names; >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + clks_cnt = of_property_count_strings(np, "clock-names"); >>>>>>>>> + if (!clks_cnt) >>>>>>>>> + return NULL; >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + opt_clk_names = kzalloc(sizeof(char *)*clks_cnt, GFP_KERNEL); >>>>>>>>> + if (!opt_clk_names) >>>>>>>>> + return NULL; >>>>>>>>> + >>>>>>>>> + for (i = 0; i < clks_cnt; i++) { >>>>>>>>> + of_property_read_string_index(np, "clock-names", i, &clk_name); >>>>>>>>> + if (!strcmp(clk_name, "fck")) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Could we instead parse for names that are "optional,role_name" instead >>>>>>>> of assuming anything other than fck is optional clocks? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> you mean look for anything with optional,*? because the role names would change. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> yes. the idea being, we now have a meaning to the clock name - there are >>>>>> two types of clocks here.. functional and optional, we *might* have >>>>>> facility to add interface clock(we dont know interface clock handling >>>>>> yet, but something in the future).. we might increase the support for >>>>>> number of functional clocks.. it might help to keep the format such that >>>>>> it is a "bit extendable". >>>>> >>>>> I completely disagree. The only things that should appear in clock-names >>>>> are the names of the clock inputs that appear in the manual for the >>>>> device. The driver should know which ones are optional, as that's a >>>>> fixed property of the IP and the way the driver uses it. >>>>> >>>>> You should not be embedding additional semantics in name properties. >>>> >>>> we use an level of abstraction called omap_device and hwmod to allow devices to use a generic pm_runtime. drivers for specific blocks dont normally need to know about the clocks to deal with. This allows maximum reuse consider concept is generic enough. >>> >>> They do know about the optional clocks though and request and release them when needed. The need for hwmod to know about optional clocks >>> (and enable all) arises from the fact that some of these devices need *some* optional clocks for a successful reset. >>> And given hmwod has no knowledge about which optional ones (if at all) will be needed, it goes ahead and enables all before doing a reset. >>> This is something done only at init time and *not* something thats done every time the device is enabled by the driver using pm_runtime. >> >> To clarify: >> >> I was initially confused as to the purpose of the code. I'm not against >> a one-off clock initialisation to put everything into a sane state. If >> we can't trust the bootloaders, that seems like a necessary evil. I'll >> leave Mike to comment on whether and how that should be done. >> >> I do not think we should be embedding clock semantics in clock-names. >> That's not the way the property is intended to be used, it breaks >> uniformity, and it's an abuse of the system that may come back to bite >> us later. > > Mark, that makes sense. > > Nishanth, thinking some more of this, the 'optional,role-name' also won't work > for the simple reason that drivers who do clk_get(node, 'role-name') would > then simply fail. > > So I guess we need to figure out a better way to handle this. you are right :( we do have types of clock inputs to a device and therein lies our problem :( -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- 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