Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 12/44] clk: davinci: Add platform information for TI DA850 PSC | From | David Lechner <> | Date | Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:21:18 -0600 |
| |
On 01/16/2018 08:00 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote: > On Monday 08 January 2018 07:47 AM, David Lechner wrote: >> +void __init da850_psc_clk_init(void __iomem *psc0, void __iomem *psc1) >> +{ >> + struct clk_onecell_data *clk_data; >> + >> + clk_data = davinci_psc_register_clocks(psc0, da850_psc0_info, 16); >> + if (!clk_data) >> + return; >> + >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[3], NULL, "ti-aemif"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[3], "aemif", "davinci-nand.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[4], NULL, "spi_davinci.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[5], NULL, "da830-mmc.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[9], NULL, "serial8250.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[14], "arm", NULL); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[15], NULL, "davinci-rproc.0"); >> + >> + clk_free_onecell_data(clk_data); >> + >> + clk_data = davinci_psc_register_clocks(psc1, da850_psc1_info, 32); >> + if (!clk_data) >> + return; >> + >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[1], "usb20_psc_clk", NULL); > > Is this con_id really needed now? Searching for "usb20_psc_clk" in your > tree results in only this one hit.
Yes, this is left over from previous attempts.
> >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[1], NULL, "musb-da8xx"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[1], NULL, "cppi41-dmaengine"); > > I guess multiple dev_id matches like these are another hurdle in moving > them to davinci_psc_clk_info[] table? If its too cumbersome to keep > multiple entries in the table, they can be handled as an exception at > the end of processing the table? Still they are not the norm so I hope > the normal case will still benefit.
Right, as I mentioned in the reply to the previous patch, instead of assigning a con_id and dev_id to each clock, we would need to assign an array with a list of clocks. I think that would work better than trying to handle the extras as an exception since there, on average, about 5 per SoC.
> >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[2], NULL, "ohci-da8xx"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[3], "gpio", NULL); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[5], NULL, "davinci_emac.1"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[5], "fck", "davinci_mdio.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[7], NULL, "davinci-mcasp.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[8], "fck", "ahci_da850"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[9], NULL, "vpif"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[10], NULL, "spi_davinci.1"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[11], NULL, "i2c_davinci.2"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[12], NULL, "serial8250.1"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[13], NULL, "serial8250.2"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[14], NULL, "davinci-mcbsp.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[15], NULL, "davinci-mcbsp.1"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[16], "fck", "da8xx_lcdc.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[17], "fck", "ehrpwm.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[17], "fck", "ehrpwm.1"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[18], NULL, "da830-mmc.1"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[20], "fck", "ecap.0"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[20], "fck", "ecap.1"); >> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[20], "fck", "ecap.2"); >> + >> + clk_free_onecell_data(clk_data); >> +} > > Thanks, > Sekhar >
|  |