Re: [PATCH/RFC 3/4] of/clk: Register clocks suitable for Runtime PM with the PM core

Geert Uytterhoeven
2014-04-30T21:47:14Z

Hi Kevin,

On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 1:44 AM, Kevin Hilman <khilman@linaro.org> wrote:
> Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be> writes:
>> When adding a device from DT, check if its clocks are suitable for Runtime
>> PM, and register them with the PM core.
>> If Runtime PM is disabled, just enable the clock.
>>
>> This allows the PM core to automatically manage gate clocks of devices for
>> Runtime PM.
>
> ...unless the device is already in an existing pm_domain, right?

At this point in the kernel boot process, the device cannot be in a
pm_domain yet.

> I like this approach, and it extends nicely what we already do on
> platforms using drivers/base/power/clock_ops.c into DT land.
>
> My only concern is how this will interact if it's used along with
> devices that have existing pm_domains. I don't have any specific
> concerns (yet, because it's Friday, and my brain is turing off), but it
> just made me wonder if this will be potentially confusing.

Adding devices to pm_domains is done later, so it can be overridden.

> Also...
>
> [...]
>
>> +static int of_clk_register(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk)
>> +{
>> + int error;
>> +
>> + if (!dev->pm_domain) {
>> + error = pm_clk_create(dev);
>> + if (error)
>> + return error;
>> +
>> + dev->pm_domain = &of_clk_pm_domain;
>> + }
>> +
>> + dev_dbg(dev, "Setting up clock for runtime PM management\n");
>> + return pm_clk_add_clk(dev, clk);
>
> I would've expected these 2 lines to be inside the pm_domain check.
>
> What's the reason for doing the pm_clk_add() when the pm_domain isn't
> going to be used? I suppose it's harmless, but it's a bit confusing.

Sorry, the !dev->pm_domain check does deserve a comment explaining this.
If there are multiple clocks suitable for pm_runtime, the pm_clk_create(dev)
should be done only once.

Currently e.g. davinci registers 3 clocks with pm_clk ("fck",
"master", and "slave").
Omap has 2 ("fck" and "ick").

BTW, keystone doesn't seem to set pm_clk_notifier_block.con_ids. From a quick
look, this will crash with a NULL-pointer dereference in pm_clk_notify()? Or am
I missing something here?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds