Messages in this thread |  | | From | Nicolas Boichat <> | Date | Mon, 16 Dec 2019 15:28:58 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v9 6/9] soc: mediatek: Add extra sram control |
| |
On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 2:47 PM Weiyi Lu <weiyi.lu@mediatek.com> wrote: > > For some power domains like vpu_core on MT8183 whose sram need to > do clock and internal isolation while power on/off sram. > We add a flag "sram_iso_ctrl" in scp_domain_data to judge if we > need to do the extra sram isolation control or not. > > Signed-off-by: Weiyi Lu <weiyi.lu@mediatek.com> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > index 2bbf907..0676b46 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > @@ -57,6 +57,8 @@ > #define PWR_ON_BIT BIT(2) > #define PWR_ON_2ND_BIT BIT(3) > #define PWR_CLK_DIS_BIT BIT(4) > +#define PWR_SRAM_CLKISO_BIT BIT(5) > +#define PWR_SRAM_ISOINT_B_BIT BIT(6) > > #define PWR_STATUS_CONN BIT(1) > #define PWR_STATUS_DISP BIT(3) > @@ -115,6 +117,8 @@ enum clk_id { > * @name: The domain name. > * @sta_mask: The mask for power on/off status bit. > * @ctl_offs: The offset for main power control register. > + * @sram_iso_ctrl: The flag to judge if the power domain need to do > + * the extra sram isolation control. > * @sram_pdn_bits: The mask for sram power control bits. > * @sram_pdn_ack_bits: The mask for sram power control acked bits. > * @bus_prot_mask: The mask for single step bus protection. > @@ -130,6 +134,7 @@ struct scp_domain_data { > const char *name; > u32 sta_mask; > int ctl_offs; > + bool sram_iso_ctrl; > u32 sram_pdn_bits; > u32 sram_pdn_ack_bits; > u32 bus_prot_mask; > @@ -269,6 +274,14 @@ static int scpsys_sram_enable(struct scp_domain *scpd, void __iomem *ctl_addr) > return ret; > } > > + if (scpd->data->sram_iso_ctrl) { > + val = readl(ctl_addr) | PWR_SRAM_ISOINT_B_BIT; > + writel(val, ctl_addr); > + udelay(1); > + val &= ~PWR_SRAM_CLKISO_BIT; > + writel(val, ctl_addr); > + } > + > return 0; > } > > @@ -278,8 +291,16 @@ static int scpsys_sram_disable(struct scp_domain *scpd, void __iomem *ctl_addr) > u32 pdn_ack = scpd->data->sram_pdn_ack_bits; > int tmp; > > - val = readl(ctl_addr); > - val |= scpd->data->sram_pdn_bits; > + if (scpd->data->sram_iso_ctrl) { > + val = readl(ctl_addr); > + val |= PWR_SRAM_CLKISO_BIT;
You do this in 1 line above. I don't really care, but be consistent? e.g. val = readl(ctl_addr) | PWR_SRAM_CLKISO_BIT;
> + writel(val, ctl_addr); > + val &= ~PWR_SRAM_ISOINT_B_BIT; > + writel(val, ctl_addr); > + udelay(1); > + } > + > + val = readl(ctl_addr) | scpd->data->sram_pdn_bits; > writel(val, ctl_addr); > > /* Either wait until SRAM_PDN_ACK all 1 or 0 */ > -- > 1.8.1.1.dirty
|  |