Re: [PATCH 03/10] mfd: qcom_rpm: add msm8960 QDSS clock resource

Dmitry Baryshkov
2026-04-18T16:11:07Z

On Thu, Apr 16, 2026 at 03:49:33PM +0200, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> On 4/15/26 5:20 PM, Antony Kurniawan Soemardi wrote:
> > On 4/14/2026 3:07 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >> On 4/14/26 10:06 AM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >>> On 4/13/26 8:55 PM, Antony Kurniawan Soemardi via B4 Relay wrote:
> >>>> From: Antony Kurniawan Soemardi <linux@smankusors.com>
> >>>>
> >>>> msm8960 uses the same clock descriptor as apq8064 but lacked the
> >>>
> >>> This doesn't quite seem to be the case, some fields differ and
> >>> apq8064 additionally has:
> >>>
> >>> QCOM_RPM_PM8821_SMPS1
> >>> QCOM_RPM_PM8821_SMPS2
> >>> QCOM_RPM_PM8821_LDO1
> >>> QCOM_RPM_VDDMIN_GPIO
> >>
> >> Ah hmm, the MFD driver seems to provide *all* RPM resources..
> >
> > What I meant by "clock descriptor" in the commit message was
> > specifically the subset corresponding to RPM managed clocks. From what I
> > can tell based on downstream code, msm8960 and apq8064 seem to share the
> > same set of RPM clocks, even though the overall resource lists differ.
> >
> > Is that understanding correct?
>
> If that's struct msm_rpm_map_data on msm-3.x, then I see that 8x60 has:
>
> +MSM_RPM_MAP(PLL_4, PLL_4, 1),
> +MSM_RPM_MAP(SMI_CLK, SMI_CLK, 1),
>
> While 8960 has:
> -MSM_RPM_MAP(QDSS_CLK, QDSS_CLK, 1),

You are comparing 8x60 to 8960, while it should be 8960 to 8064.

I see that there are differences, but the QDSS is the same.

--
With best wishes
Dmitry