Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 6/8] arm64: dts: add SRAM, MHU mailbox and SCPI support on Juno | From | "Jon Medhurst (Tixy)" <> | Date | Mon, 08 Jun 2015 14:51:19 +0100 |
| |
On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 11:40 +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: [...] > + > + scpi { > + compatible = "arm,scpi"; > + mboxes = <&mailbox 1>; > + shmem = <&cpu_scp_hpri>; > + > + clocks { > + compatible = "arm,scpi-clocks"; > + > + scpi_dvfs: scpi_clocks@0 { > + compatible = "arm,scpi-dvfs-clocks"; > + #clock-cells = <1>; > + clock-indices = <0>, <1>, <2>; > + clock-output-names = "vbig", "vlittle", "vgpu";
From where do the clock names derive? They look more like names for voltage domains rather than clocks. My (admittedly very old) Juno docs, have the clocks as ATLCLK, APLCLK and GPUCLK.
> + }; > + scpi_clk: scpi_clocks@3 { > + compatible = "arm,scpi-variable-clocks"; > + #clock-cells = <1>; > + clock-indices = <3>, <4>; > + clock-output-names = "pxlclk0", "pxlclk1";
Can we also have clock index 5, name 'i2s_clk', for used by audio? (I don't know what other clocks the SCP currently supports, but audio is one being currently used by the out-of-tree code).
Also, I believe that both display outputs share the same clock, and so pxlclk0 and pxlclk1 can't be controlled independently. But I guess these device-tree entries are for the interface to the SCP firmware, not the hardware, and if that pretends the clocks are independent...
-- Tixy
|  |