Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v11 07/10] soc: mediatek: Add extra sram control | From | Matthias Brugger <> | Date | Tue, 11 Feb 2020 18:04:50 +0100 |
| |
On 20/12/2019 04:46, Weiyi Lu 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> > Reviewed-by: Nicolas Boichat <drinkcat@chromium.org> > --- > drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > index 32be4b3..1972726 100644 > --- a/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > +++ b/drivers/soc/mediatek/mtk-scpsys.c > @@ -56,6 +56,8 @@ > #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) > @@ -86,6 +88,8 @@ > * @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. > * @basic_clk_name: The basic clocks required by this power domain. > @@ -98,6 +102,7 @@ struct scp_domain_data { > const char *name; > u32 sta_mask; > int ctl_offs; > + bool sram_iso_ctrl;
Why don't we put that into the caps variable? We have plenty of space left there and if needed we can bump up its value from u8 to u32.
> u32 sram_pdn_bits; > u32 sram_pdn_ack_bits; > const char *basic_clk_name[MAX_CLKS]; > @@ -233,6 +238,14 @@ 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; > } > > @@ -242,8 +255,15 @@ 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) | PWR_SRAM_CLKISO_BIT; > + writel(val, ctl_addr); > + val &= ~PWR_SRAM_ISOINT_B_BIT; > + writel(val, ctl_addr); > + udelay(1);
Why do we need to wait here?
> + } > + > + val = readl(ctl_addr) | scpd->data->sram_pdn_bits; > writel(val, ctl_addr); > > /* Either wait until SRAM_PDN_ACK all 1 or 0 */ >
| |