From: Stephan Gerhold <stephan@gerhold.net>
To: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@codeaurora.org>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org>,
Georgi Djakov <georgi.djakov@linaro.org>,
linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-clk@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Qcom clock performance votes on mainline
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2020 08:26:02 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200911062602.GA2827@gerhold.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200911060556.bntj3s74je75orel@vireshk-i7>
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 11:35:56AM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11-09-20, 07:48, Stephan Gerhold wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 10, 2020 at 02:28:01PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > Quoting Stephan Gerhold (2020-09-10 09:26:10)
> > > > Hi Stephen, Hi Rajendra,
> > > >
> > > > while working on some MSM8916 things I've been staring at the downstream
> > > > clock-gcc-8916.c [1] driver a bit. One thing that confuses me are the
> > > > voltage/performance state votes that are made for certain clocks within
> > > > the driver. Specifically lines like
> > > >
> > > > VDD_DIG_FMAX_MAP2(LOW, 32000000, NOMINAL, 64000000),
> > > >
> > > > on certain clocks like UART, I2C or SPI. There does not seem to be
> > > > anything equivalent in the mainline clock driver at the moment.
> > > >
> > > > As far as I understand from related discussions on mailing lists [2],
> > > > these performance votes are not supposed to be added to the clock
> > > > driver(s), but rather as required-opps within OPP tables of all the
> > > > consumers. Is that correct?
> > >
> > > Yes.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > As a second question, I'm wondering about one particular case:
> > > > I've been trying to get CPR / all the CPU frequencies working on MSM8916.
> > > > For that, I already added performance state votes for VDDMX and CPR as
> > > > required-opps to the CPU OPP table.
> > > >
> > > > After a recent discussion [3] with Viresh about where to enable power
> > > > domains managed by the OPP core, I've been looking at all the
> > > > performance state votes made in the downstream kernel again.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, the A53 PLL used for the higher CPU frequencies also has such
> > > > voltage/performance state votes. The downstream driver declares the
> > > > clock like [4]:
> > > >
> > > > .vdd_class = &vdd_sr2_pll,
> > > > .fmax = (unsigned long [VDD_SR2_PLL_NUM]) {
> > > > [VDD_SR2_PLL_SVS] = 1000000000,
> > > > [VDD_SR2_PLL_NOM] = 1900000000,
> > > > },
> > > > .num_fmax = VDD_SR2_PLL_NUM,
> > > >
> > > > which ends up as votes for the VDDCX power domain.
> > > >
> > > > Now I'm wondering: Where should I make these votes on mainline?
> > > > Should I add it as yet another required-opps to the CPU OPP table?
> > >
> > > Sounds like the right approach.
> > >
> >
> > Thanks for the quick reply!
> >
> > > >
> > > > It would be a bit of a special case because these votes are only done
> > > > for the A53 PLL (which is only used for the higher CPU frequencies, not
> > > > the lower ones)...
> > >
> > > Can that be put into the OPP table somehow for only the high
> > > frequencies? The OPP tables for CPUs sometimes cover the CPU PLL voltage
> > > requirements too so it doesn't seem like a totally bad idea.
>
> Maybe we can allow the vote value to be 0 somehow ?
>
Yep, I tried using an extra opp-level = <0> OPP for that in [1].
It does not work at the moment but maybe we can (somehow) add support
for that. I have some more thoughts about where/how to enable the power
domains from the OPP core in this case. The discussion probably fits
better to the other mail thread so I will reply there later.
Thanks!
Stephan
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20200828095706.GA1865@gerhold.net/
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-09-11 6:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-09-10 16:26 Qcom clock performance votes on mainline Stephan Gerhold
2020-09-10 21:28 ` Stephen Boyd
2020-09-11 5:48 ` Stephan Gerhold
2020-09-11 6:05 ` Viresh Kumar
2020-09-11 6:26 ` Stephan Gerhold [this message]
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=20200911062602.GA2827@gerhold.net \
--to=stephan@gerhold.net \
--cc=georgi.djakov@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rnayak@codeaurora.org \
--cc=sboyd@kernel.org \
--cc=ulf.hansson@linaro.org \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.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