Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Aug 2022 09:05:00 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH V2] clk: imx: support protected-clocks | From | Peng Fan <> |
| |
On 8/16/2022 11:02 PM, Sascha Hauer wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 09:03:27PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote: >> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> >> >> For the clocks listed in protected-clocks, enable them to avoid >> Linux disable them. This will benifit root Linux and inmate cell run >> on top of Jailhouse hypervisor, and benifit the other case( >> A53 Linux run together with M7 RTOS). >> >> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@nxp.com> >> --- >> >> V2: >> Per Sascha, use common protected-clocks property. > > See my mail to v1. I did not request that you should use the > protected-clocks property: > >> There were cases when a property first started with a "soc," prefix and >> later when people realized that it could be useful for other >> drivers/SoCs as well, the prefix was removed. With that in mind I >> would expect that a "fsl,protected-clocks" property behaves the same >> as a "protected-clocks" property without the prefix. >> >> If it doesn't please pick a different name. I didn't want to suggest >> to just drop the "fsl," prefix and to use the generic property name >> when the properties have a different meaning.
oh, I misunderstood.
Here I just wanna linux prepare enable clks and never off them, the clks may vary per different usecase.
how about fsl,init-on-clks=<xx>? or extend to fsl,init-on-clks-with-rate=<xx>?
Thanks, Peng. > > Sascha >
| |