From: geert@linux-m68k.org (Geert Uytterhoeven)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH/RFC 3/4] of/clk: Register clocks suitable for Runtime PM with the PM core
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 23:54:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdUdnoah1uZbMn_xONXZ2i8wG5kY7msMzCdBwS+xt9tmDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140429131610.29859C4094A@trevor.secretlab.ca>
Hi Grant,
On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 3:16 PM, Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca> wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2014 16:44:58 -0700, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> wrote:
>> Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> writes:
>>
>> > When adding a device from DT, check if its clocks are suitable for Runtime
>> > PM, and register them with the PM core.
>> > If Runtime PM is disabled, just enable the clock.
>> >
>> > This allows the PM core to automatically manage gate clocks of devices for
>> > Runtime PM.
>>
>> ...unless the device is already in an existing pm_domain, right?
>>
>> I like this approach, and it extends nicely what we already do on
>> platforms using drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c into DT land.
>>
>> My only concern is how this will interact if it's used along with
>> devices that have existing pm_domains. I don't have any specific
>> concerns (yet, because it's Friday, and my brain is turing off), but it
>> just made me wonder if this will be potentially confusing.
>
> I have big concerns about this approach. First, it will only work if
> a clock is available at deivce creation time. The conversion of irq
> controllers to normal device drivers has already shown that is a bad
> idea.
That's indeed a valid concern that needs to be addressed.
> I also don't like that it tries to set up every clock, but there is no
> guarantee that the driver will even use it. I would rather see this
> behaviour linked into the function that obtains the clock at driver
> .probe() time. That way it can handle deferred probe correctly and it
> only sets up clocks that are actually used by the driver.
Not every clock. Only the clocks that are advertised by the clock driver as
being suitable for runtime_pm management. These are typically module
clocks, that must be enabled for the module to work. The driver doesn't
always want to handle these explicitly.
In fact we have one case on shmobile where the module clock for an IP
core (rcar-gpio) is enabled unconditionally in one SoC, while it became
controllable through a gate clock in a later SoC.
With my patch, just adding the clock to the DT node is sufficient to make
it work.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-04-30 21:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-24 10:13 [PATCH/RFC 0/4] of: Register clocks for Runtime PM with PM core Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-24 10:13 ` [PATCH/RFC 1/4] clk: Add CLK_RUNTIME_PM and clk_may_runtime_pm() Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-24 10:13 ` [PATCH/RFC 2/4] PM / clock_ops: Add pm_clk_add_clk() Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-24 10:13 ` [PATCH/RFC 3/4] of/clk: Register clocks suitable for Runtime PM with the PM core Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-24 13:11 ` Ulf Hansson
2014-04-24 14:09 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-26 1:59 ` Tomasz Figa
2014-05-02 8:13 ` Ulf Hansson
2014-05-02 14:58 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-05-06 7:58 ` Ulf Hansson
2014-04-30 21:23 ` Laurent Pinchart
2014-04-30 22:06 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-25 23:44 ` Kevin Hilman
2014-04-29 13:16 ` Grant Likely
2014-04-30 21:25 ` Laurent Pinchart
2014-04-30 21:33 ` Ben Dooks
2014-04-30 21:54 ` Geert Uytterhoeven [this message]
2014-05-01 8:03 ` Grant Likely
2014-05-01 13:41 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-05-01 13:56 ` Grant Likely
2014-05-01 14:46 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-30 21:47 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-05-02 8:56 ` Ulf Hansson
2014-05-02 14:35 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-05-06 7:43 ` Ulf Hansson
2014-04-24 10:13 ` [PATCH/RFC 4/4] clk: shmobile: mstp: Set CLK_RUNTIME_PM flag Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-30 21:29 ` [PATCH/RFC 0/4] of: Register clocks for Runtime PM with PM core Laurent Pinchart
2014-04-30 22:17 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-06-12 16:53 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] use named clocks list to register clocks for PM clock domain Grygorii Strashko
2014-06-12 16:53 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] clk: of: introduce of_clk_get_from_set() Grygorii Strashko
2014-06-12 16:53 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] of/clk: use "clkops-clocks" to specify clocks handled by clock_ops domain Grygorii Strashko
2014-07-28 14:05 ` Grant Likely
2014-07-28 17:47 ` Grygorii Strashko
2014-07-29 5:52 ` Grant Likely
2014-07-30 0:06 ` Laurent Pinchart
2014-07-30 13:25 ` Grygorii Strashko
2014-12-12 17:40 ` Laurent Pinchart
2014-08-04 11:28 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-08-04 15:21 ` Laurent Pinchart
2014-09-08 20:13 ` Kevin Hilman
2014-12-12 17:52 ` Laurent Pinchart
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAMuHMdUdnoah1uZbMn_xONXZ2i8wG5kY7msMzCdBwS+xt9tmDA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).