Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] clk: mediatek: mt8195: Add support for frequency hopping through FHCTL

Chen-Yu Tsai
2023-03-07T09:30:19Z

On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 5:27 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> wrote:
>
> Il 07/03/23 05:43, Chen-Yu Tsai ha scritto:
> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2023 at 6:01 PM AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
> > <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Add FHCTL parameters and register PLLs through FHCTL to add support
> >> for frequency hopping and SSC. FHCTL will be enabled only on PLLs
> >> specified in devicetree.
> >>
> >> This commit brings functional changes only upon addition of
> >> devicetree configuration.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno <angelogioacchino.delregno@collabora.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt8195-apmixedsys.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++-
> >> 1 file changed, 66 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt8195-apmixedsys.c b/drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt8195-apmixedsys.c
> >> index 1bc917f2667e..c0db31ce0741 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt8195-apmixedsys.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/clk/mediatek/clk-mt8195-apmixedsys.c
> >> @@ -3,9 +3,11 @@
> >> // Copyright (c) 2021 MediaTek Inc.
> >> // Author: Chun-Jie Chen <chun-jie.chen@mediatek.com>
> >>
> >> +#include "clk-fhctl.h"
> >> #include "clk-gate.h"
> >> #include "clk-mtk.h"
> >> #include "clk-pll.h"
> >> +#include "clk-pllfh.h"
> >>
> >> #include <dt-bindings/clock/mt8195-clk.h>
> >> #include <linux/of_device.h>
> >> @@ -105,6 +107,61 @@ static const struct mtk_pll_data plls[] = {
> >> 0, 0, 22, 0x0158, 24, 0, 0, 0, 0x0158, 0, 0x0158, 0, 9),
> >> };
> >>
> >> +enum fh_pll_id {
> >> + FH_ARMPLL_LL,
> >> + FH_ARMPLL_BL,
> >> + FH_MEMPLL,
> >> + FH_ADSPPLL,
> >> + FH_NNAPLL,
> >> + FH_CCIPLL,
> >> + FH_MFGPLL,
> >> + FH_TVDPLL2,
> >> + FH_MPLL,
> >> + FH_MMPLL,
> >> + FH_MAINPLL,
> >> + FH_MSDCPLL,
> >> + FH_IMGPLL,
> >> + FH_VDECPLL,
> >> + FH_TVDPLL1,
> >> + FH_NR_FH,
> >> +};
> >> +
> >> +#define FH(_pllid, _fhid, _offset) { \
> >> + .data = { \
> >> + .pll_id = _pllid, \
> >> + .fh_id = _fhid, \
> >> + .fh_ver = FHCTL_PLLFH_V2, \
> >> + .fhx_offset = _offset, \
> >> + .dds_mask = GENMASK(21, 0), \
> >
> >> + .slope0_value = 0x6003c97, \
> >> + .slope1_value = 0x6003c97, \
> >
> > Are these
> >
> >> + .sfstrx_en = BIT(2), \
> >> + .frddsx_en = BIT(1), \
> >> + .fhctlx_en = BIT(0), \
> >> + .tgl_org = BIT(31), \
> >> + .dvfs_tri = BIT(31), \
> >> + .pcwchg = BIT(31), \
> >
> >> + .dt_val = 0x0, \
> >> + .df_val = 0x9, \
> >
> > and these just copied from MT8186?
>
> Yes, and that's because they're really the same.

Just to be safe, I asked MediaTek to take a look at the parameters.

> >
> >> + .updnlmt_shft = 16, \
> >> + .msk_frddsx_dys = GENMASK(23, 20), \
> >> + .msk_frddsx_dts = GENMASK(19, 16), \
> >> + }, \
> >> + }
> >> +
> >> +static struct mtk_pllfh_data pllfhs[] = {
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_ADSPPLL, FH_ADSPPLL, 0x78),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_NNAPLL, FH_NNAPLL, 0x8c),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_MFGPLL, FH_MFGPLL, 0xb4),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_TVDPLL2, FH_TVDPLL2, 0xc8),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_MMPLL, FH_MMPLL, 0xf0),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_MAINPLL, FH_MAINPLL, 0x104),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_MSDCPLL, FH_MSDCPLL, 0x118),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_IMGPLL, FH_IMGPLL, 0x12c),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_VDECPLL, FH_VDECPLL, 0x140),
> >> + FH(CLK_APMIXED_TVDPLL2, FH_TVDPLL1, 0x154),
> >> +};
> >> +
> >> static const struct of_device_id of_match_clk_mt8195_apmixed[] = {
> >> { .compatible = "mediatek,mt8195-apmixedsys", },
> >> {}
> >> @@ -114,13 +171,17 @@ static int clk_mt8195_apmixed_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> {
> >> struct clk_hw_onecell_data *clk_data;
> >> struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
> >> + const u8 *fhctl_node = "mediatek,mt8195-fhctl";
> >> int r;
> >>
> >> clk_data = mtk_alloc_clk_data(CLK_APMIXED_NR_CLK);
> >> if (!clk_data)
> >> return -ENOMEM;
> >>
> >> - r = mtk_clk_register_plls(node, plls, ARRAY_SIZE(plls), clk_data);
> >> + fhctl_parse_dt(fhctl_node, pllfhs, ARRAY_SIZE(pllfhs));
> >> +
> >> + r = mtk_clk_register_pllfhs(node, plls, ARRAY_SIZE(plls),
> >> + pllfhs, ARRAY_SIZE(pllfhs), clk_data);
> >> if (r)
> >> goto free_apmixed_data;
> >>
> >> @@ -140,7 +201,8 @@ static int clk_mt8195_apmixed_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >> unregister_gates:
> >> mtk_clk_unregister_gates(apmixed_clks, ARRAY_SIZE(apmixed_clks), clk_data);
> >> unregister_plls:
> >> - mtk_clk_unregister_plls(plls, ARRAY_SIZE(plls), clk_data);
> >> + mtk_clk_unregister_pllfhs(plls, ARRAY_SIZE(plls), pllfhs,
> >> + ARRAY_SIZE(pllfhs), clk_data);
> >
> > Nit: I think this could be squeezed into one line.
> >
> >> free_apmixed_data:
> >> mtk_free_clk_data(clk_data);
> >> return r;
> >> @@ -153,7 +215,8 @@ static int clk_mt8195_apmixed_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>
> >> of_clk_del_provider(node);
> >> mtk_clk_unregister_gates(apmixed_clks, ARRAY_SIZE(apmixed_clks), clk_data);
> >> - mtk_clk_unregister_plls(plls, ARRAY_SIZE(plls), clk_data);
> >> + mtk_clk_unregister_pllfhs(plls, ARRAY_SIZE(plls), pllfhs,
> >> + ARRAY_SIZE(pllfhs), clk_data);
> >
> > Same here.
> >
>
> That's the same on the others as well, but if I compress those lines I will have
> to rebase the clocks cleanup series again and send the 54 patches again.. I'd like
> to avoid that noise.
>
> If you really want though, I can do that... what should I do?

I see. Let's keep it the way it is then.