Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 2 Nov 2022 14:15:26 +0530 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1] clk: qcom: gcc-sc8280xp: add cxo as parent for gcc_ufs_ref_clkref_clk | From | Shazad Hussain <> |
| |
On 11/2/2022 1:43 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 01:28:48PM +0530, Shazad Hussain wrote: >> On 11/2/2022 12:46 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 01, 2022 at 11:23:59AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: >>>> Quoting Shazad Hussain (2022-10-30 07:23:33) >>>>> Since 'commit f3aa975e230e ("arm64: dts: qcom: sc8280xp: correct ref >>>> >>>> So we should have a Fixes tag for this commit? Or really back to the >>>> beginning of the driver? >>>> >>>>> clock for ufs_mem_phy")' we need to explicitly make cxo as parent to >>>>> gcc_ufs_ref_clkref_clk to have an independent vote from ufs_mem_phy. >>> >>> The commit message is slightly misleading as this affects the other UFS >>> PHY as well. >>> >>> If CX is indeed a parent of this clock then the issue has been there >>> since the clock driver was added. (And otherwise, the PHY binding may >>> need to be amended instead.) > >> CX is not the actual parent of this clk. GCC_UFS_REF_CLKREF_CLK is an >> external clk to the device, which needs to be voted. If we use the >> GCC_UFS_REF_CLKREF_CLK as ref clk, we don't have explicit vote for CX >> from ufs_mem_phy. >> >> If no client votes for CX,(very unlikely) then it's won't be ON for >> ufs_mem_phy as well right ! So to maintain the voting to CX, we make >> this as parent to ref clk. > > Right, but if the PHYs really requires CX and it is not an ancestor of > the refclk then this should be described by the binding (and not be > hidden away in the clock driver). > > Johan
This makes sense, will be posting v2 post for the same. I assume this should use the Fixes tag then !
Shazad
| |