Hello,
On Thursday, May 10, 2012 11:14 AM Kukjin Kim wrote:
> Marek Szyprowski wrote:
> >
> > EXYNOS4_CLKGATE_BLOCK register can be used to disable the respective
> > multimedia block hardware planes. It acts similar to the power domains.
> > This patch adds transparent support for this method of gating of
> > multimedia blocks. New clocks are added as parents to the respective
> > block bus clocks. This patch has been tested on NURI and UniversalC210
> > boards, which have bootloader which disable all multimedia blocks with
> > both GATE BLOCK method and power domains.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4.c | 54
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4.c b/arch/arm/mach-
> > exynos/clock-exynos4.c
> > index 4287311..a2f8b2e 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-exynos/clock-exynos4.c
> > @@ -213,6 +213,11 @@ static int exynos4_clk_dac_ctrl(struct clk *clk, int
> > enable)
> > return s5p_gatectrl(S5P_DAC_PHY_CONTROL, clk, enable);
> > }
> >
> > +static int exynos4_clk_gate_block_ctrl(struct clk *clk, int enable)
> > +{
> > + return s5p_gatectrl(EXYNOS4_CLKGATE_BLOCK, clk, enable);
> > +}
> > +
> > /* Core list of CMU_CPU side */
> >
> > static struct clksrc_clk exynos4_clk_mout_apll = {
> > @@ -459,6 +464,37 @@ static struct clksrc_clk exynos4_clk_sclk_vpll = {
> > .reg_src = { .reg = EXYNOS4_CLKSRC_TOP0, .shift = 8, .size = 1 },
> > };
> >
> > +static struct clk exynos4_clk_gate_cam = {
> > + .name = "cam",
> > + .enable = exynos4_clk_gate_block_ctrl,
> > + .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct clk exynos4_clk_gate_tv = {
> > + .name = "tv",
> > + .enable = exynos4_clk_gate_block_ctrl,
> > + .ctrlbit = (1 << 1),
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct clk exynos4_clk_gate_mfc = {
> > + .name = "mfc",
> > + .enable = exynos4_clk_gate_block_ctrl,
> > + .ctrlbit = (1 << 2),
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct clk exynos4_clk_gate_lcd0 = {
> > + .name = "lcd0",
> > + .enable = exynos4_clk_gate_block_ctrl,
> > + .ctrlbit = (1 << 4),
> > +};
> > +
> > +static struct clk *exynos4_gate_clocks[] = {
> > + &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > + &exynos4_clk_gate_tv,
> > + &exynos4_clk_gate_mfc,
> > + &exynos4_clk_gate_lcd0,
> > +};
> > +
> > static struct clk exynos4_init_clocks_off[] = {
> > {
> > .name = "timers",
> > @@ -470,36 +506,43 @@ static struct clk exynos4_init_clocks_off[] = {
> > .devname = "s5p-mipi-csis.0",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_cam_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 4),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > }, {
> > .name = "csis",
> > .devname = "s5p-mipi-csis.1",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_cam_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 5),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > }, {
> > .name = "jpeg",
> > .id = 0,
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_cam_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 6),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > }, {
> > .name = "fimc",
> > .devname = "exynos4-fimc.0",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_cam_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > }, {
> > .name = "fimc",
> > .devname = "exynos4-fimc.1",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_cam_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 1),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > }, {
> > .name = "fimc",
> > .devname = "exynos4-fimc.2",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_cam_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 2),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > }, {
> > .name = "fimc",
> > .devname = "exynos4-fimc.3",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_cam_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 3),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_cam,
> > }, {
> > .name = "hsmmc",
> > .devname = "s3c-sdhci.0",
> > @@ -534,31 +577,37 @@ static struct clk exynos4_init_clocks_off[] = {
> > .devname = "s5p-sdo",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_tv_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 2),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_tv,
> > }, {
> > .name = "mixer",
> > .devname = "s5p-mixer",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_tv_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 1),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_tv,
> > }, {
> > .name = "vp",
> > .devname = "s5p-mixer",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_tv_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_tv,
> > }, {
> > .name = "hdmi",
> > .devname = "exynos4-hdmi",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_tv_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 3),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_tv,
> > }, {
> > .name = "hdmiphy",
> > .devname = "exynos4-hdmi",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_hdmiphy_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_tv,
> > }, {
> > .name = "dacphy",
> > .devname = "s5p-sdo",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_dac_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_tv,
> > }, {
> > .name = "adc",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_peril_ctrl,
> > @@ -623,11 +672,13 @@ static struct clk exynos4_init_clocks_off[] = {
> > .name = "fimg2d",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_image_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_lcd0,
> > }, {
> > .name = "mfc",
> > .devname = "s5p-mfc",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_mfc_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_mfc,
> > }, {
> > .name = "i2c",
> > .devname = "s3c2440-i2c.0",
> > @@ -795,6 +846,7 @@ static struct clk exynos4_clk_fimd0 = {
> > .devname = "exynos4-fb.0",
> > .enable = exynos4_clk_ip_lcd0_ctrl,
> > .ctrlbit = (1 << 0),
> > + .parent = &exynos4_clk_gate_lcd0,
> > };
> >
> > struct clk *exynos4_clkset_group_list[] = {
> > @@ -1565,6 +1617,8 @@ void __init exynos4_register_clocks(void)
> > s3c_register_clksrc(exynos4_clksrcs, ARRAY_SIZE(exynos4_clksrcs));
> > s3c_register_clocks(exynos4_init_clocks_on,
> > ARRAY_SIZE(exynos4_init_clocks_on));
> >
> > + s3c24xx_register_clocks(exynos4_gate_clocks,
> > ARRAY_SIZE(exynos4_gate_clocks));
> > +
> > s3c24xx_register_clocks(exynos4_clk_cdev,
> > ARRAY_SIZE(exynos4_clk_cdev));
> > for (ptr = 0; ptr < ARRAY_SIZE(exynos4_clk_cdev); ptr++)
> > s3c_disable_clocks(exynos4_clk_cdev[ptr], 1);
> > --
> > 1.7.1.569.g6f426
>
> I remember, we talked about the GATE BLOCK for EXYNOS.
> So now, there are any reasons it should be implemented?
I'm really, really disappointed. I've already pointed a few times that we need support for
GATE BLOCK. I really don't get why you are so stubborn and refuse any attempt to add support
for it. Are these registers secret? Do they cause a sudden death of the user once kernel
writes a few bits to them? I really don't get it. We have provided at least a few solutions,
all which have been rejected without any serious TECHNICAL reason. Our bootloader disabled
all peripherals to save power (leak current). One of the method this disabling is to use
GATE BLOCK register. To get everything working with mainline kernel WE need support for
it. Simple.
Best regards
--
Marek Szyprowski
Samsung Poland R&D Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
