From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFCCAC48BD5 for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 18:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C68162085A for ; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 18:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="kiXWQi1Q"; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="vcR9gmJZ" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org C68162085A Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Message-Id:Date:Subject:From:To: References:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=VHKeI4gyWAZq6GpW0JzElmCPibHc9R6WevIYJJ+tASM=; b=kiXWQi1QRZH+ck QAueKYOZNDD9FY7oQo0hM0iMcXOWMk4VYh3lvBYNVBmspRvFs/Gzoxytyeve/FNNjCuu69HBSJfWF pVJnsgziUwC/3qepqbL6AgUj23Gpyv9oXq5rn8z2VQKnDVNfPBbJNGvawn2tWZrBYGtmslLczMP+h TDC1ptwlqiJ4ebx0TCEFFMBUbyggW0jM08wT1YcP8bcfnY4yiR6vgVLruBrWkx18IKThXLNjrwKoh /Vpr4qYWEl47qy8EaHtkvozn8KbZEAr5pFkyx9wJGhqQjKcq+0SX3cvZTljWJvFAlhRym1n0CLvsO YKRDzOaKBEpv7+/6yIlg==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hfqbN-0002ar-JT; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 18:55:33 +0000 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hfqbK-0002aJ-Df for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 18:55:31 +0000 Received: from kernel.org (unknown [104.132.0.74]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ACAF52085A; Tue, 25 Jun 2019 18:55:29 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1561488929; bh=CU/pi1jDqoAxTEEO83+4ZsORpoB/lyIbsA7mD6/R9HY=; h=In-Reply-To:References:To:From:Subject:Cc:Date:From; b=vcR9gmJZJ9TmQdBp8TcKLhGKYvrdW1PlBKzqzOSCiwznX260bcm2xeLhLjpjalFuk xIaSshROHzPyZCwur+DKJZ6juJUGyYx9W6LpDJGP5JB7u6t0ZYIS/mNnSdc8oNM+rr fQiOUa2dbEWCZem77UsrtRicO7pQh2JeTvZrIVms= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2ba035cc-2381-ce36-3b7d-f5027ef9ef40@ti.com> References: <1deb7a85-0859-54f1-950a-33de3a08f9fd@ti.com> <20190625011711.3D2D520663@mail.kernel.org> <2ba035cc-2381-ce36-3b7d-f5027ef9ef40@ti.com> To: Michael Turquette , Santosh Shilimkar , Tero Kristo , linux-clk From: Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] clk: keystone: changes for 5.3 v2 User-Agent: alot/0.8.1 Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2019 11:55:28 -0700 Message-Id: <20190625185529.ACAF52085A@mail.kernel.org> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190625_115530_485699_BA1CA694 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 20.74 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Quoting Tero Kristo (2019-06-25 03:33:50) > On 25/06/2019 04:17, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > Quoting Tero Kristo (2019-06-12 04:56:15) > >> Hi Stephen, Mike, Santosh, > >> > >> Here's a 2nd take of the pull request for the clock changes for keystone > >> SoC for 5.3. The only change compared to the v1 is to add the required > >> drivers/firmware change in. This avoids the nasty dependency between the > >> pull requests between the clock driver and firmware driver. > >> > >> -Tero > > > > Thanks. Pulled into clk-next. I guess we should increase the size of the > > number of parents that can exist to be more than a u8? We're close to > > getting there with the new way of specifying clk parents, so maybe we > > should expand it to an unsigned int, but then we may need to optimize > > finding parents when searching through all the parents of a clk. > > For now, this is not an issue with TI SoC:s at least, I think we only > have like 64 parents at max for muxes. Ok. It doesn't sound like a priority then. > > > Also, there isn't any quantification of how much better it is to scan DT > > for all the clks that are used and only register those ones. It would be > > nice to understand how much better it is to do that sort of scan vs. > > just populating all clks at boot time. > > I haven't done measurements lately, but it provides pretty drastic > improvement. On am65x for example, it cuts the scan time from bit more > than 1 second to couple of hundred milliseconds. I don't have > measurements for the new j721e SoC, but I would believe the improvement > is even more with that one. Cool. Thanks for the numbers. > > > It may be useful to make the code > > generic because NXP folks also want to populate clks from DT so maybe we > > should provide this from the core framework somehow to ask providers to > > register a particular clk or not. I haven't thought about it at all, but > > it may come up that we totally rewrite this code in the future to be > > shared outside of the TI clk driver. > > It might also be worth thinking whether some sort of lazy clock probe > would be possible... now we register everything at one go, but would it > be possible to only register / reparent clocks once they are actually > requested by some driver? Sure. Ideally the optimization isn't vendor driver specific. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel