[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] drm/omap: Migrate minimum FCK/PCK ratio from Kconfig to dts

> Am 28.05.2019 um 17:09 schrieb Adam Ford <>:
> On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 4:11 AM Tomi Valkeinen <> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> On 10/05/2019 22:42, Adam Ford wrote:
>>> Currently the source code is compiled using hard-coded values
>>> from CONFIG_OMAP2_DSS_MIN_FCK_PER_PCK. This patch allows this
>>> clock divider value to be moved to the device tree and be changed
>>> without having to recompile the kernel.
>>> Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <>
>> I understand why you want to do this, but I'm not sure it's a good idea.
>> It's really something the driver should figure out, and if we add it to
>> the DT, it effectively becomes an ABI.
>> That said... I'm not sure how good of a job the driver could ever do, as
>> it can't know the future scaling needs of the userspace at the time it
>> is configuring the clock. And so, I'm not nacking this patch, but I
>> don't feel very good about this patch...
>> The setting also affects all outputs (exluding venc), which may not be
>> what the user wants. Then again, I think this setting is really only
>> needed on OMAP2 & 3, which have only a single output. But that's the
>> same with the current kconfig option, of course.
>> So, the current CONFIG_OMAP2_DSS_MIN_FCK_PER_PCK is an ugly hack, in my
>> opinion, and moving it to DT makes it a worse hack =). But I don't have
>> any good suggestions either.
> As it stands the Logic PD OMAP35 and AM37/DM37 boards (SOM-LV and
> Torpedo) require this to be hard coded to 4 or it hangs during start.
> This is the case for all versions 4.2+. I haven't tested it with
> older stuff. Tony has a DM3730 Torpedo kit and reported the hanging
> issue to me. I told him to set that value to 4 to make it not hang.
> He asked that I move it to the DT to avoid custom kernels. I agree
> it's a hack, but if it's create a customized defconfig file for 4
> boards or modify the device tree, it seems like the device tree
> approach is less intrusive.

Well, if this boards needs a factor 4 to be defined, it is IMHO
100 % correct to describe this in the DTS and nowhere else. Like
minimum and maximum voltage of a regulator which is also very board

Unless it can be figured out automatically. If it turns out later
that it can, I would assume the drivers can simply ignore the hint
in the DTS?

Just my 2cts without knowing details and having tested anything
on our DM37 boards.


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-28 17:21    [W:0.153 / U:1.676 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site