On 04/12/2018 09:25, Joseph Lo wrote:
> The Tegra124 cpufreq driver has no information to handle the Vdd-CPU
> rail. So the driver shouldn't handle for the CPU clock switching from
> DFLL to other PLL clocks. It was designed to work on DFLL clock only,
> which handle the frequency/voltage scaling in the background. This
> patch removes the driver dependency of the CPU rail.
>
> Cc: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Signed-off-by: Joseph Lo <josephl@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm | 2 +-
> drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c | 26 ++------------------------
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> index 4e1131ef85ae..a609f8820c47 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.arm
> @@ -262,7 +262,7 @@ config ARM_TEGRA20_CPUFREQ
>
> config ARM_TEGRA124_CPUFREQ
> tristate "Tegra124 CPUFreq support"
> - depends on ARCH_TEGRA && CPUFREQ_DT && REGULATOR
> + depends on ARCH_TEGRA && CPUFREQ_DT
> default y
> help
> This adds the CPUFreq driver support for Tegra124 SOCs.
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c
> index 43530254201a..448d00763d00 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/tegra124-cpufreq.c
> @@ -22,11 +22,9 @@
> #include <linux/of.h>
> #include <linux/platform_device.h>
> #include <linux/pm_opp.h>
> -#include <linux/regulator/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/types.h>
>
> struct tegra124_cpufreq_priv {
> - struct regulator *vdd_cpu_reg;
> struct clk *cpu_clk;
> struct clk *pllp_clk;
> struct clk *pllx_clk;
> @@ -60,14 +58,6 @@ static int tegra124_cpu_switch_to_dfll(struct tegra124_cpufreq_priv *priv)
> return ret;
> }
>
> -static void tegra124_cpu_switch_to_pllx(struct tegra124_cpufreq_priv *priv)
> -{
> - clk_set_parent(priv->cpu_clk, priv->pllp_clk);
> - clk_disable_unprepare(priv->dfll_clk);
> - regulator_sync_voltage(priv->vdd_cpu_reg);
> - clk_set_parent(priv->cpu_clk, priv->pllx_clk);
> -}
> -
> static int tegra124_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> {
> struct tegra124_cpufreq_priv *priv;
> @@ -88,16 +78,10 @@ static int tegra124_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (!np)
> return -ENODEV;
>
> - priv->vdd_cpu_reg = regulator_get(cpu_dev, "vdd-cpu");
> - if (IS_ERR(priv->vdd_cpu_reg)) {
> - ret = PTR_ERR(priv->vdd_cpu_reg);
> - goto out_put_np;
> - }
> -
> priv->cpu_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(np, "cpu_g");
> if (IS_ERR(priv->cpu_clk)) {
> ret = PTR_ERR(priv->cpu_clk);
> - goto out_put_vdd_cpu_reg;
> + goto out_put_np;
> }
>
> priv->dfll_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(np, "dfll");
> @@ -129,15 +113,13 @@ static int tegra124_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> platform_device_register_full(&cpufreq_dt_devinfo);
> if (IS_ERR(priv->cpufreq_dt_pdev)) {
> ret = PTR_ERR(priv->cpufreq_dt_pdev);
> - goto out_switch_to_pllx;
> + goto out_put_pllp_clk;
> }
>
> platform_set_drvdata(pdev, priv);
>
> return 0;
>
> -out_switch_to_pllx:
> - tegra124_cpu_switch_to_pllx(priv);
> out_put_pllp_clk:
> clk_put(priv->pllp_clk);
> out_put_pllx_clk:
> @@ -146,8 +128,6 @@ static int tegra124_cpufreq_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> clk_put(priv->dfll_clk);
> out_put_cpu_clk:
> clk_put(priv->cpu_clk);
> -out_put_vdd_cpu_reg:
> - regulator_put(priv->vdd_cpu_reg);
> out_put_np:
> of_node_put(np);
>
> @@ -159,13 +139,11 @@ static int tegra124_cpufreq_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> struct tegra124_cpufreq_priv *priv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>
> platform_device_unregister(priv->cpufreq_dt_pdev);
> - tegra124_cpu_switch_to_pllx(priv);
>
> clk_put(priv->pllp_clk);
> clk_put(priv->pllx_clk);
> clk_put(priv->dfll_clk);
> clk_put(priv->cpu_clk);
> - regulator_put(priv->vdd_cpu_reg);
I see what you are saying and while this does appear to be broken, it
also does not seem right that if we load and unload this driver the CPU
clock parent will remain as the DFLL clock. Can't we query the voltage
of the vdd-cpu regulator before we switch and then restore it before we
switch back?
I am just trying to understand if there is no way to switch back? If not
then maybe we should not allow this driver to be built as a module and
remove the removal function altogether.
Cheers
Jon
--
nvpublic
