Re: [Letux-kernel] [PATCH v3 3/3] arm: omap_hwmod disable ick autoidling when a hwmod requires that

J, KEERTHY
2019-01-19T06:40:37Z

On 1/19/2019 1:18 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> * Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> [190118 19:42]:
>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 20:38:47 +0100
>> Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:36:30 -0800
>>> Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>> til the next workaround.
>>>>
>>>>> That flags also causes the iclk being enabled/disabled
>>>>> manually.
>>>>
>>>> Yes but SWSUP_IDLE for the interface clock to me currently
>>>> just means:
>>>>
>>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock"
>>>>
>>> well, if we want to manually disable it and not automatically,
>>> we have to disable autoidle or it will be automatically disabled.
>>>
>>> Disabling it manually when it is already auto-disabled (by autoidle) is
>>> just practically a no-op towards the clock.
>>>
>>>> and with your changes it becomes:
>>>>
>>>> "manually enable and disable ocp interface clock and block
>>>> autoidle while in use".
>>>>
>>>> So aren't we now changing the way things behave in general
>>>> for SWSUP_IDLE?
>>>>
>>> Yes, we are, so proper testing is needed. But If I read those comments
>>> it was always intended this way but not fully implemented because it
>>> appeared to be more work like needing a usecounter (which my patchset
>>> also adds) for that autoidle flag.
>>>
>> and there are quite few hwmods marked by this flag.
>> And then there are those clocks marked by this flags (on am33xx) which
>> do not have that autoidle feature at all, so the risk is not too high.
>
> Keerthy, can you please test this series on top of the
> related clock patches with your am335x PM test cases?

Can you point me to the clock series that needs to be tested
along with this?

- Keerthy

>
> Regards,
>
> Tony
>
>