From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: tegra210: Add SLCG override gate clocks To: Jon Hunter , Thierry Reding References: <1457638685-31007-1-git-send-email-rklein@nvidia.com> <20160314160551.GA21898@ulmo.nvidia.com> <56E6E20C.6020807@nvidia.com> <56E7CA79.7060106@nvidia.com> CC: Peter De Schrijver , Prashant Gaikwad , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd , Stephen Warren , Alexandre Courbot , , , Bill Huang From: Rhyland Klein Message-ID: <56F581BF.2070903@nvidia.com> Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 14:21:51 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <56E7CA79.7060106@nvidia.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Return-Path: rklein@nvidia.com List-ID: On 3/15/2016 4:40 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 14/03/16 16:08, Rhyland Klein wrote: >> On 3/14/2016 12:05 PM, Thierry Reding wrote: >>> * PGP Signed by an unknown key >>> >>> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 02:38:05PM -0500, Rhyland Klein wrote: >>>> From: Bill Huang >>>> >>>> Add some SLCG (Second Level Clock Gating) override clocks to control >>>> gating and un-gating their logics. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Bill Huang >>>> Signed-off-by: Rhyland Klein >>>> --- >>>> drivers/clk/tegra/clk-id.h | 16 ++++++ >>>> drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra210.c | 91 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>>> include/dt-bindings/clock/tegra210-car.h | 32 +++++------ >>>> 3 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) >>> >>> There's no rationale given here about why we need this. What will these >>> second level clock gates be used for? Why do we need these (seemingly) >>> duplicate clock entries. >>> >> >> These are going to be used in the to-be posted patchset around >> powergating. As of now they are unused, which is why I hadn't added them >> previously. I just wanted to try to get this dependency in before the >> powergate series was posted. > > Yes we are using these on the Pixel C (aka. Smaug) and I suggested to > Rhyland that we upstream them. Eventually we will use them but only > after the core GenPD changes for Tegra are merged. From my perspective I > was thinking it is better to reduce the changes between the chromeos > 3.18 kernel and mainline. However, if you wish to wait until we need > them I guess we can. Otherwise ... > > Acked-by: Jon Hunter > > Cheers > Jon > Thierry do you think we should hold off on this until Jon's patches are ready or merge this sooner? -rhyland -- nvpublic