Re: [PATCH] media: qcom: camss: Enable setting the rate to camnoc_rt_axi clock

Vladimir Zapolskiy
2025-10-16T14:59:09Z

On 10/16/25 15:22, Loic Poulain wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 1:50 PM Bryan O'Donoghue
> <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-vfe.c b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-vfe.c
>>>>> index ee08dbbddf88..09b29ba383f1 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-vfe.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/media/platform/qcom/camss/camss-vfe.c
>>>>> @@ -914,7 +914,8 @@ static int vfe_match_clock_names(struct vfe_device *vfe,
>>>>> return (!strcmp(clock->name, vfe_name) ||
>>>>> !strcmp(clock->name, vfe_lite_name) ||
>>>>> !strcmp(clock->name, "vfe_lite") ||
>>>>> - !strcmp(clock->name, "camnoc_axi"));
>>>>> + !strcmp(clock->name, "camnoc_axi") ||
>>>>> + !strcmp(clock->name, "camnoc_rt_axi"));
>>>>
>>>> Just use camnoc_axi for both. Look at your bindings - why do you keep
>>>> different names for same signal?
>>>
>>> I think the correct question to ask is:
>>>
>>> Is camnoc_axi going to represent the other (NRT) clock in this
>>> setting?
>>>
>>> Konrad
>>
>> I'm - perhaps naively - assuming this clock really is required ... and
>> that both will be needed concurrently.
>
> AFAIU, the NRT clock is not in use for the capture part, and only
> required for the offline processing engine (IPE, OPE), which will
> likely be described as a separated node.
>

Does it mean the clock handling should be removed from QCM2290 or
X1E80100 VFEx resources? Has it been tested/verified?

--
Best wishes,
Vladimir