Re: [PATCHv3 10/10] CLK: TI: always enable DESHDCP clock

Re: [PATCHv3 10/10] CLK: TI: always enable DESHDCP clock

[Paul Walmsley]

On Wed, 20 May 2015, Stephen Boyd wrote:

> On 05/20/15 04:50, Tero Kristo wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>> @@ -348,5 +348,10 @@ int __init dra7xx_dt_clk_init(void)
> >>>       if (rc)
> >>>           pr_err("%s: failed to set USB_DPLL M2 OUT\n", __func__);
> >>>
> >>> +    hdcp_ck = clk_get_sys(NULL, "dss_deshdcp_clk");
> >>> +    rc = clk_prepare_enable(hdcp_ck);
> >>> +    if (rc)
> >>> +        pr_err("%s: failed to set dss_deshdcp_clk\n", __func__);
> >>> +
> >>>       return rc;
> >>>   }
> >>>
> >>
> >> You should rather use the assigned-clock properties in DT to accomplish
> >> this, the manual clock tweaks under the drivers/clk/ti/clk-* files
> >> should be converted to DT setup also.
> >
> > Now that I sent this, I realize we only have support to set_parent /
> > set_rate through the assigned-clock props, no enable. Any plans to
> > extend this support Mike/Stephen?
> >
> >
> 
> Enable falls under the "critical clocks" discussion that is ongoing. I
> assume that this is some sort of critical clock that can't be turned off?

It only needs to be enabled for this particular display IP subsystem to 
function:

http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=142071550111482&w=2

I believe Tomi is taking this approach (enabling it unconditionally) to 
avoid adding support for a secondary IP block "main clock" to the hwmod 
code.  Apparently, the chips that contain this clock gating bit are not 
intended to be used for power-critical use cases, so there's not much 
motivation to switch it on and off with the display controller.


- Paul

Re: [PATCHv3 10/10] CLK: TI: always enable DESHDCP clock

[Tomi Valkeinen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 980 bytes --]



On 21/05/15 06:06, Paul Walmsley wrote:

>> Enable falls under the "critical clocks" discussion that is ongoing. I
>> assume that this is some sort of critical clock that can't be turned off?
> 
> It only needs to be enabled for this particular display IP subsystem to 
> function:
> 
> http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=142071550111482&w=2
> 
> I believe Tomi is taking this approach (enabling it unconditionally) to 
> avoid adding support for a secondary IP block "main clock" to the hwmod 

Right. I don't think that would be a simple task (correct me if I'm
wrong), and that would all be only for this one IP on this particular
SoC type.

> code.  Apparently, the chips that contain this clock gating bit are not 
> intended to be used for power-critical use cases, so there's not much 
> motivation to switch it on and off with the display controller.

Even in power-critical use cases the the power use difference should be
negligible.

 Tomi


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]