Re: [PATCH v2 3/8] clk: imx: add driver for imx8ulp's sim lpav

Laurentiu Mihalcea
2025-10-27T09:51:02Z

On 10/22/2025 7:03 AM, Peng Fan wrote:
> Hi Laurentiu,
>
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 04:20:20AM -0700, Laurentiu Mihalcea wrote:
>> From: Laurentiu Mihalcea <laurentiu.mihalcea@nxp.com>
>>
>> The i.MX8ULP System Integration Module (SIM) LPAV module is a block
>> control module found inside the LPAV subsystem, which offers some clock
>> gating options and reset line assertion/de-assertion capabilities.
>>
>> Therefore, the clock gate management is supported by registering the
>> module's driver as a clock provider, while the reset capabilities are
>> managed via the auxiliary device API to allow the DT node to act as a
>> reset and clock provider.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Laurentiu Mihalcea <laurentiu.mihalcea@nxp.com>
>> ---
> ....
>> +struct clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_data {
>> + void __iomem *base;
>> + struct regmap *regmap;
>> + spinlock_t lock; /* shared by MUX, clock gate and reset */
>> + unsigned long flags; /* for spinlock usage */
> This does not need to be here, put it as function local variable should
> be fine.
>
>> + struct clk_hw_onecell_data clk_data; /* keep last */
>> +};
>> +
>> +struct clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_gate {
>> + const char *name;
>> + int id;
>> + const struct clk_parent_data parent;
>> + u8 bit;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static struct clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_gate gates[] = {
>> + IMX8ULP_HIFI_CLK_GATE("hifi_core", CORE, "hifi_core", 17),
>> + IMX8ULP_HIFI_CLK_GATE("hifi_pbclk", PBCLK, "lpav_bus", 18),
>> + IMX8ULP_HIFI_CLK_GATE("hifi_plat", PLAT, "hifi_plat", 19)
> For the parent name, my understanding is they should be the one
> from clk-imx8ulp.c, but I not find them, or may I miss something?

we want to use parent names local to the SIM LPAV provider (i.e. names specified via clock-names)

instead of the global ones. See definition of "struct clk_parent_data".

while we're at it, maybe it would be a good idea to drop the ".name = pname" assignment bit

as that won't work anyways since we're relying on local parent names?

>
>> +};
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER
>> +static void clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_aux_reset_release(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct auxiliary_device *adev = to_auxiliary_dev(dev);
>> +
>> + kfree(adev);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static void clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_unregister_aux_reset(void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct auxiliary_device *adev = data;
>> +
>> + auxiliary_device_delete(adev);
>> + auxiliary_device_uninit(adev);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_register_aux_reset(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> + struct auxiliary_device *adev __free(kfree) = NULL;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + adev = kzalloc(sizeof(*adev), GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!adev)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + adev->name = "reset";
>> + adev->dev.parent = &pdev->dev;
>> + adev->dev.release = clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_aux_reset_release;
>> +
>> + ret = auxiliary_device_init(adev);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to initialize aux dev\n");
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> +
>> + ret = auxiliary_device_add(adev);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + auxiliary_device_uninit(adev);
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to add aux dev\n");
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return devm_add_action_or_reset(&pdev->dev,
>> + clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_unregister_aux_reset,
>> + no_free_ptr(adev));
> clk_imx8ulp_sim_lpav_unregister_aux_reset() clean up the resources, if
> moving this before auxiliary_device_add(), then no need
> auxiliary_device_uninit() when add fails?

the whole chunk guarded by the #ifdef CONFIG_RESET_CONTROLLER should go away

anyways once I switch to devres as Frank suggested

>
>> +}
> Regards
> Peng