From: Zhongqiu Han <zhongqiu.han@oss.qualcomm.com>
To: Akashdeep Kaur <a-kaur@ti.com>,
praneeth@ti.com, nm@ti.com, vigneshr@ti.com, rafael@kernel.org,
viresh.kumar@linaro.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: vishalm@ti.com, sebin.francis@ti.com, k-willis@ti.com,
zhongqiu.han@oss.qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/1] cpufreq: ti: Add EPROBE_DEFER for K3 SoCs
Date: Wed, 3 Jun 2026 21:52:12 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <b02e6e6e-bee2-4f17-a048-cacab8ceb473@oss.qualcomm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260603072438.1199527-2-a-kaur@ti.com>
On 6/3/2026 3:24 PM, Akashdeep Kaur wrote:
> On K3 SoCs, ti-cpufreq relies on k3-socinfo to register the SoC
> device before soc_device_match() can return valid revision
> information. If ti-cpufreq probes before k3-socinfo,
> soc_device_match() returns NULL, leading to incorrect CPU frequency
> scaling behavior.
>
> Add a needs_k3_socinfo flag to ti_cpufreq_soc_data (similar to
> the existing multi_regulator pattern) to defer probe when k3-socinfo
> hasn't registered the SoC device yet.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akashdeep Kaur <a-kaur@ti.com>
Looks good to me with small one nit inline.
Reviewed-by: Zhongqiu Han <zhongqiu.han@oss.qualcomm.com>
> ---
> drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> index a01abc1622eb..f2c8d9e3a1b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> @@ -99,6 +99,7 @@ struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data {
> unsigned long efuse_shift;
> unsigned long rev_offset;
> bool multi_regulator;
> + bool needs_k3_socinfo;
> /* Backward compatibility hack: Might have missing syscon */
> #define TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_MAY_BE_MISSING 0x1
> /* Backward compatibility hack: new syscon size is 1 register wide */
> @@ -347,6 +348,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am625_soc_data = {
> .efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
> .efuse_shift = 0x6,
> .multi_regulator = false,
> + .needs_k3_socinfo = true,
> .quirks = TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_IS_SINGLE_REG,
> };
>
> @@ -356,6 +358,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62a7_soc_data = {
> .efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
> .efuse_shift = 0x6,
> .multi_regulator = false,
> + .needs_k3_socinfo = true,
> };
>
> static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62l3_soc_data = {
> @@ -364,6 +367,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62l3_soc_data = {
> .efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
> .efuse_shift = 0x6,
> .multi_regulator = false,
> + .needs_k3_socinfo = true,
> };
>
> static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62p5_soc_data = {
> @@ -372,6 +376,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62p5_soc_data = {
> .efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
> .efuse_shift = 0x6,
> .multi_regulator = false,
> + .needs_k3_socinfo = true,
> };
>
> /**
> @@ -443,6 +448,11 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_get_rev(struct ti_cpufreq_data *opp_data,
> goto done;
> }
>
> + /* Defer if k3-socinfo hasn't registered the SoC device yet */
> + if (opp_data->soc_data->needs_k3_socinfo)
> + return dev_err_probe(opp_data->cpu_dev, -EPROBE_DEFER,
> + "SoC device not registered by k3-socinfo\n");
Nit: dev_err_probe() attaches the defer reason to cpu_dev instead of the
ti-cpufreq platform device, so devices_deferred won't show it, right
That said, this matches the existing pattern in ti_cpufreq_probe() where
all dev_err/dev_dbg calls use opp_data->cpu_dev.
If so, maybe it could be cleaned up in a separate patch.
> +
> ret = regmap_read(opp_data->syscon, opp_data->soc_data->rev_offset,
> &revision);
> if (opp_data->soc_data->quirks & TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_MAY_BE_MISSING && ret == -EIO) {
> --
> 2.34.1
>
--
Thx and BRs,
Zhongqiu Han
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-03 13:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-03 7:24 [PATCH v5 0/1] cpufreq: ti: Fix probe ordering with k3-socinfo Akashdeep Kaur
2026-06-03 7:24 ` [PATCH v5 1/1] cpufreq: ti: Add EPROBE_DEFER for K3 SoCs Akashdeep Kaur
2026-06-03 13:52 ` Zhongqiu Han [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=b02e6e6e-bee2-4f17-a048-cacab8ceb473@oss.qualcomm.com \
--to=zhongqiu.han@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=a-kaur@ti.com \
--cc=k-willis@ti.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nm@ti.com \
--cc=praneeth@ti.com \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=sebin.francis@ti.com \
--cc=vigneshr@ti.com \
--cc=viresh.kumar@linaro.org \
--cc=vishalm@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox