lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Jan]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [Letux-kernel] [PATCH v3 3/3] arm: omap_hwmod disable ick autoidling when a hwmod requires that
    On Sat, 19 Jan 2019 12:09:48 +0530
    "J, KEERTHY" <j-keerthy@ti.com> wrote:

    > On 1/19/2019 1:18 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
    > > * Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> [190118 19:42]:
    > >> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:38:47 +0100
    > >> Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>> Hi,
    > >>>
    > >>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:36:30 -0800
    > >>> Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>> [...]
    > >>>> til the next workaround.
    > >>>>
    > >>>>> That flags also causes the iclk being enabled/disabled
    > >>>>> manually.
    > >>>>
    > >>>> Yes but SWSUP_IDLE for the interface clock to me currently
    > >>>> just means:
    > >>>>
    > >>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock"
    > >>>>
    > >>> well, if we want to manually disable it and not automatically,
    > >>> we have to disable autoidle or it will be automatically disabled.
    > >>>
    > >>> Disabling it manually when it is already auto-disabled (by autoidle) is
    > >>> just practically a no-op towards the clock.
    > >>>
    > >>>> and with your changes it becomes:
    > >>>>
    > >>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock and block
    > >>>> autoidle while in use".
    > >>>>
    > >>>> So aren't we now changing the way things behave in general
    > >>>> for SWSUP_IDLE?
    > >>>>
    > >>> Yes, we are, so proper testing is needed. But If I read those comments
    > >>> it was always intended this way but not fully implemented because it
    > >>> appeared to be more work like needing a usecounter (which my patchset
    > >>> also adds) for that autoidle flag.
    > >>>
    > >> and there are quite few hwmods marked by this flag.
    > >> And then there are those clocks marked by this flags (on am33xx) which
    > >> do not have that autoidle feature at all, so the risk is not too high.
    > >
    > > Keerthy, can you please test this series on top of the
    > > related clock patches with your am335x PM test cases?
    >
    > Can you point me to the clock series that needs to be tested
    > along with this?
    >

    https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-clk/list/?series=66691

    Regards,
    Andreas

    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2019-01-19 08:12    [W:16.485 / U:0.016 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site