From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter De Schrijver Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] clk: tegra: Add la clock for Tegra210 Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2018 13:23:50 +0200 Message-ID: <20180124112350.GG7031@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com> References: <1516699369-3513-1-git-send-email-pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> <1516699369-3513-2-git-send-email-pdeschrijver@nvidia.com> <31118e4b-80bd-1db2-0a82-9359b99deccf@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <31118e4b-80bd-1db2-0a82-9359b99deccf-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Jon Hunter Cc: linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-clk-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 10:03:31AM +0000, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 23/01/18 09:22, Peter De Schrijver wrote: > > This clock is needed by the memory built-in self test work around. > > > > Signed-off-by: Peter De Schrijver > > --- > > drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra210.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > > include/dt-bindings/clock/tegra210-car.h | 2 +- > > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra210.c b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra210.c > > index 9e62608..f790c2d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra210.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/tegra/clk-tegra210.c > > @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ > > #define CLK_SOURCE_CSITE 0x1d4 > > #define CLK_SOURCE_EMC 0x19c > > #define CLK_SOURCE_SOR1 0x410 > > +#define CLK_SOURCE_LA 0x1f8 > > > > #define PLLC_BASE 0x80 > > #define PLLC_OUT 0x84 > > @@ -2654,6 +2655,13 @@ static int tegra210_init_pllu(void) > > sor1_parents_idx, 0, &sor1_lock), > > }; > > > > +static const char * const la_parents[] = { > > + "pll_p", "pll_c2", "pll_c", "pll_c3", "pll_re_out1", "pll_a1", "clk_m", "pll_c4_out0" > > +}; > > + > > I was comparing this with downstream and it appears that the parents are > listed as "pll_p", "pll_c", "pll_m", "clk_m". Can you double check the > above is correct? > For all I can see the parents as listed in dowstream are incorrect. Likely only pll_p is used in practice, so noone has noticed this. pll_m for example can only be used by emc since T210, so it cannot be part of the parent list of la. Peter.