> Subject: Re: Question: why call clk_prepare in pm_clk_acquire > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 06:58:49PM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > Hi Sudeep, > > > > CC Dien Pham > > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 6:49 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux- > m68k.org> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 4:51 PM Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > On Fri, Sep 09, 2022 at 01:12:03PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 19:38, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@xxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Sep 08, 2022 at 04:37:13PM +0200, Ulf Hansson wrote: > > > > > > > On Thu, 8 Sept 2022 at 09:33, Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > wrote: > > > > > > > > We are facing an issue clk_set_rate fail with commit > a3b884cef873 ("firmware: > > > > > > > > arm_scmi: Add clock management to the SCMI power domain") > > > > > > > > , > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hmm, I wonder about the main reason behind that commit. Can > > > > > > > we revert it or is there some platform/driver that is really relying > on it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > IIUC, at the time of the commit, it was needed on some Renesas > platform. > > > > > > Not sure if it is still used or not. > > > > > > > > > > Okay! Maybe Nico remembers more, as he authored the patch... > > > > > > > > > > > > > May be, or even check with Renesas team who tested his patch. > > > > > > I'm not aware of Renesas platforms using SCMI... > > > > Upon closer look, Diep Pham did report a build issue in the SCMI code, > > so perhaps Diep knows more... > > > > Yes indeed, Diep Pham tested the original patch IIRC and also has reported > few bugs in SCMI clock code which are fixed. Hence I know it is used by > Renesas. > > Hi Peng, > > Absence of DTS changes indicate nothing. I am aware of couple of vendors > who use SCMI on several platforms and do report issues regularly and help > in review of the code. So DTS is not a good indicator of SCMI usage > unfortunately. On reason could be that since it is a firmware, bootloaders > can detect and update DTS, just my thought and may differ from the reality. Could we make the GENPD_FLAG_PM_CLK as a optional flag as Ulf suggested? Such as non scmi clk platforms not require this flag, or any other suggestion? Regards, Peng. > > -- > Regards, > Sudeep