Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: clock: sophgo: add clock controller for SG2044

[Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>]

Quoting Inochi Amaoto (2025-03-12 18:08:11)
> On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 04:43:51PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Quoting Inochi Amaoto (2025-03-12 16:29:43)
> > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2025 at 04:14:37PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > > Quoting Inochi Amaoto (2025-03-11 16:31:29)
> > > > > 
> > > > > > or if that syscon node should just have the #clock-cells property as
> > > > > > part of the node instead.
> > > > > 
> > > > > This is not match the hardware I think. The pll area is on the middle
> > > > > of the syscon and is hard to be separated as a subdevice of the syscon
> > > > > or just add  "#clock-cells" to the syscon device. It is better to handle
> > > > > them in one device/driver. So let the clock device reference it.
> > > > 
> > > > This happens all the time. We don't need a syscon for that unless the
> > > > registers for the pll are both inside the syscon and in the register
> > > > space 0x50002000. Is that the case? 
> > > 
> > > Yes, the clock has two areas, one in the clk controller and one in
> > > the syscon, the vendor said this design is a heritage from other SoC.
> > 
> > My question is more if the PLL clk_ops need to access both the syscon
> > register range and the clk controller register range. What part of the
> > PLL clk_ops needs to access the clk controller at 0x50002000?
> > 
> 
> The PLL clk_ops does nothing, but there is an implicit dependency:
> When the PLL change rate, the mux attached to it must switch to 
> another source to keep the output clock stable. This is the only
> thing it needed.

I haven't looked at the clk_ops in detail (surprise! :) but that sounds
a lot like the parent of the mux is the PLL and there's some "safe"
source that is needed temporarily while the PLL is reprogrammed for a
new rate. Is that right? I recall the notifier is in the driver so this
sounds like that sort of design.