From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <55C9DE57.2090105@st.com> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:36:55 +0200 From: Maxime Coquelin MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Geert Uytterhoeven CC: Lee Jones , Michael Turquette , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , , Stephen Boyd , Maxime Ripard , Sascha Hauer Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 3/3] clk: introduce CLK_ENABLE_HAND_OFF flag References: <1438974570-20812-1-git-send-email-mturquette@baylibre.com> <1438974570-20812-4-git-send-email-mturquette@baylibre.com> <20150810144811.GN3249@x1> <20150810185516.2416.32293@quantum> <20150811084329.GA13374@x1> <55C9C82F.6060401@st.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed List-ID: Hi Geert, On 08/11/2015 12:11 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Maxime, > > On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Maxime Coquelin > wrote: >> How can we pass CLK_ENABLE_HAND_OFF flag to a specific clock on STi >> platform? > Add the flag to the relevant clocks in the C code, e.g. in > clk_register_flexgen(): > > if (!strcmp(name, "clk-icn-cpu")) > init.flags |= CLK_ENABLE_HAND_OFF; The main problem I see with this proposal > >> Could we imagine having a kind of "clocks-enable-hand-off" property we could >> use in our clock controller DT node? > You can imagine doing "flex_flags |= CLK_ENABLE_HAND_OFF" in > st_of_flexgen_setup(), depending on the presence of such a property. Exactly, this is what I was thinking about. > > However, not disabling clocks is a software policy, not a hardware description, > so IMHO it doesn't belong in DT. > I disagree here because if these clocks get gated the system is dead, so I wouldn't call this a SW Policy. Moreover, I don't see how this property is different from assigned-clock-parents and assigned-clock-rates properties, which have been accepted. Thanks, Maxime