From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: sourav.poddar@ti.com (sourav)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:21:08 +0530
Subject: [PATCH] arm: dts: am43x-clock: add tbclk data for ehrpwm.
In-Reply-To: <535A0571.5070608@ti.com>
References: <1398162345-3163-1-git-send-email-sourav.poddar@ti.com>
 <53566374.3070609@ti.com> <5359F5CF.6020408@ti.com> <535A0571.5070608@ti.com>
Message-ID: <535A05DC.7020206@ti.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Friday 25 April 2014 12:19 PM, Tero Kristo wrote:
> On 04/25/2014 08:42 AM, sourav wrote:
>> Hi Tero,
>>
>> On Tuesday 22 April 2014 06:11 PM, Tero Kristo wrote:
>>> On 04/22/2014 01:25 PM, Sourav Poddar wrote:
>>>> We need "tblclk" clock data for the functioning of ehrpwm
>>>> module. Hence, populating the required clock information
>>>> in clock dts file.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Sourav Poddar <sourav.poddar@ti.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/am43xx-clocks.dtsi |   84
>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>   drivers/clk/ti/clk-43xx.c            |    6 +++
>>>>   2 files changed, 90 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am43xx-clocks.dtsi
>>>> b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am43xx-clocks.dtsi
>>>> index 142009c..869f9a5 100644
>>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/am43xx-clocks.dtsi
>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/am43xx-clocks.dtsi
>>>> @@ -87,6 +87,90 @@
>>>>           clock-mult = <1>;
>>>>           clock-div = <1>;
>>>>       };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm0_gate_tbclk: ehrpwm0_gate_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-no-wait-gate-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&dpll_per_m2_ck>;
>>>> +        ti,bit-shift = <0>;
>>>> +        reg = <0x0664>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm0_tbclk: ehrpwm0_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&ehrpwm0_gate_tbclk>;
>>>> +    };
>>>
>>> Why do you use composite-clock type here? I see only add one sub-clock
>>> to the composite, thus the composite part is unused. How about using a
>>> gate-clock type only? Same question applies for the rest of the patch
>>> also.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, I though of doing so and I think it should be fine to use
>> gate-clock only. I did this following the ehrpwm clock data in
>> "am33xx-clock.dtsi" file, where we use composite clock for ehrpwm. I
>> think it needs to be changed there also.?
>
> Yeah, that seems to be a quirk that was generated by the automatic 
> conversion script, there is no reason for these being composite clocks 
> either.

OK, I will send the updated patch for both am33xx and am43xx devices.

Thanks,
Sourav
>
> -Tero
>
>>
>> -Sourav
>>> -Tero
>>>
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm1_gate_tbclk: ehrpwm1_gate_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-no-wait-gate-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&dpll_per_m2_ck>;
>>>> +        ti,bit-shift = <1>;
>>>> +        reg = <0x0664>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm1_tbclk: ehrpwm1_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&ehrpwm1_gate_tbclk>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm2_gate_tbclk: ehrpwm2_gate_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-no-wait-gate-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&dpll_per_m2_ck>;
>>>> +        ti,bit-shift = <2>;
>>>> +        reg = <0x0664>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm2_tbclk: ehrpwm2_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&ehrpwm2_gate_tbclk>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm3_gate_tbclk: ehrpwm3_gate_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-no-wait-gate-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&dpll_per_m2_ck>;
>>>> +        ti,bit-shift = <2>;
>>>> +        reg = <0x0664>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm3_tbclk: ehrpwm3_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&ehrpwm3_gate_tbclk>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm4_gate_tbclk: ehrpwm4_gate_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-no-wait-gate-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&dpll_per_m2_ck>;
>>>> +        ti,bit-shift = <2>;
>>>> +        reg = <0x0664>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm4_tbclk: ehrpwm4_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&ehrpwm4_gate_tbclk>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm5_gate_tbclk: ehrpwm5_gate_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-no-wait-gate-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&dpll_per_m2_ck>;
>>>> +        ti,bit-shift = <2>;
>>>> +        reg = <0x0664>;
>>>> +    };
>>>> +
>>>> +    ehrpwm5_tbclk: ehrpwm5_tbclk {
>>>> +        #clock-cells = <0>;
>>>> +        compatible = "ti,composite-clock";
>>>> +        clocks = <&ehrpwm5_gate_tbclk>;
>>>> +    };
>>>>   };
>>>> &prcm_clocks {
>>>>       clk_32768_ck: clk_32768_ck {
>>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/ti/clk-43xx.c b/drivers/clk/ti/clk-43xx.c
>>>> index 67c8de5..5413a6a 100644
>>>> --- a/drivers/clk/ti/clk-43xx.c
>>>> +++ b/drivers/clk/ti/clk-43xx.c
>>>> @@ -105,6 +105,12 @@ static struct ti_dt_clk am43xx_clks[] = {
>>>>       DT_CLK(NULL, "func_12m_clk", "func_12m_clk"),
>>>>       DT_CLK(NULL, "vtp_clk_div", "vtp_clk_div"),
>>>>       DT_CLK(NULL, "usbphy_32khz_clkmux", "usbphy_32khz_clkmux"),
>>>> +    DT_CLK("48300200.ehrpwm", "tbclk", "ehrpwm0_tbclk"),
>>>> +    DT_CLK("48302200.ehrpwm", "tbclk", "ehrpwm1_tbclk"),
>>>> +    DT_CLK("48304200.ehrpwm", "tbclk", "ehrpwm2_tbclk"),
>>>> +    DT_CLK("48306200.ehrpwm", "tbclk", "ehrpwm0_tbclk"),
>>>> +    DT_CLK("48308200.ehrpwm", "tbclk", "ehrpwm1_tbclk"),
>>>> +    DT_CLK("4830a200.ehrpwm", "tbclk", "ehrpwm2_tbclk"),
>>>>       { .node_name = NULL },
>>>>   };
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>