Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] clk: meson: t7: don't mark sys_ampipe_nand as critical

[Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>]

On sam. 12 sept. 2026 at 08:50, Lucas Tanure <tanure@linux.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 12, 2026 at 1:08 AM Brian Masney <bmasney@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Lucas,
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 05, 2026 at 04:32:34PM +0100, Lucas Tanure wrote:
>> > sys_ampipe_nand clocks the pipeline stage inserted in the bus path
>> > between the SD/eMMC controllers and the NIC_MATRIX fabric. It does have
>> > identifiable consumers - the three MMC controllers - so marking it
>> > critical was the wrong tool: the clock should be referenced from the
>> > consumer nodes and claimed by the mmc driver instead.
>> >
>> > Drop the CLK_IS_CRITICAL flag and update the comment accordingly.
>> > sys_am2axi0..2 remain critical as they clock the AXI DMA bus itself and
>> > have no single identifiable consumer.
>> >
>> > Assisted-by: Claude:claude-fable-5
>> > Signed-off-by: Lucas Tanure <tanure@linux.com>
>> > ---
>> > This patch depends on the MMC controllers actually referencing the clock:
>> > the dt-bindings, mmc driver and t7 DTS changes adding the "pipeline"
>> > clock must land before this patch, otherwise the boot hangs and memory
>> > corruption this clock caused are reintroduced.
>>
>> This series should be merged together in one tree? Which tree? I can
>> provide an Acked-by if it should go through the mmc tree.
>>
>> Brian
>>
> It's definitely best to keep the series together in one tree to avoid
> boot regressions,
> but I think the clk tree is the better fit since the core changes
> revolve around clock logic.
> Could you accept it ?

No. This applies on top of another change already queued in the amlogic
clock tree. It can't go through the MMC tree at the moment.

This clock is not critical in mainline right now, so
1) I could merge this and it and in practice there would be no
   regression. The problem you had would still be there until the MMC
   change lands

2) Or you can wait for the MMC stuff to land and re-submit this in
   the next cycle.

Your choice. IMO, (1) is fine.

>
> thanks
> lucas

-- 
Jerome