[U-Boot] [PATCH v3 04/12] arm: socfpga: clkmgr: Separate the Clock Manager for Stratix 10

[Chin Liang See <clsee@altera.com>]

On Sen, 2016-10-17 at 17:39 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> On 10/17/2016 05:28 PM, Chin Liang See wrote:
> > 
> > On Sen, 2016-10-17 at 17:20 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > 
> > > On 10/17/2016 05:07 PM, Chin Liang See wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Sen, 2016-10-17 at 15:42 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > On 10/17/2016 03:32 PM, See, Chin Liang wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Min, 2016-10-16 at 17:33 +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On 10/13/2016 10:33 AM, Chin Liang See wrote:
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Separate the Clock Manager to support both GEN5 SoC and
> > > > > > > > Stratix 10 SoC.
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Chin Liang See <clsee@altera.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>
> > > > > > > > Cc: Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@opensource.altera.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: Ley Foon Tan <lftan@altera.com>
> > > > > > > > Cc: Tien Fong Chee <tfchee@altera.com>
> > > > > > > > ---
> > > > > > > > ?arch/arm/mach-socfpga/clock_manager.c | 8 ++++++++
> > > > > > > > ?1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/clock_manager.c
> > > > > > > > b/arch/arm/mach-
> > > > > > > > socfpga/clock_manager.c
> > > > > > > > index aa71636..0d67b3c 100644
> > > > > > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/clock_manager.c
> > > > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-socfpga/clock_manager.c
> > > > > > > > @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ?DECLARE_GLOBAL_DATA_PTR;
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_TARGET_SOCFPGA_GEN5)
> > > > > > > > ?static const struct socfpga_clock_manager
> > > > > > > > *clock_manager_base
> > > > > > > > =
> > > > > > > > ??????(struct socfpga_clock_manager
> > > > > > > > *)SOCFPGA_CLKMGR_ADDRESS;
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > @@ -446,9 +447,11 @@ unsigned int
> > > > > > > > cm_get_l4_sp_clk_hz(void)
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ??????return clock;
> > > > > > > > ?}
> > > > > > > > +#endif /* CONFIG_TARGET_SOCFPGA_GEN5 */
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ?unsigned int cm_get_mmc_controller_clk_hz(void)
> > > > > > > > ?{
> > > > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_TARGET_SOCFPGA_GEN5)
> > > > > > > > ??????uint32_t reg, clock = 0;
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > ??????/* identify the source of MMC clock */
> > > > > > > > @@ -475,8 +478,12 @@ unsigned int
> > > > > > > > cm_get_mmc_controller_clk_hz(void)
> > > > > > > > ??????/* further divide by 4 as we have fixed divider
> > > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > wrapper */
> > > > > > > > ??????clock /= 4;
> > > > > > > > ??????return clock;
> > > > > > > > +#elif defined(CONFIG_TARGET_SOCFPGA_STRATIX10)
> > > > > > > > +?????return 25000000;
> > > > > > > Is this always gonna be the case or is this S10VP
> > > > > > > specific ?
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > +#endif /* CONFIG_TARGET_SOCFPGA_GEN5 */
> > > > > > > > ?}
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > +#if defined(CONFIG_TARGET_SOCFPGA_GEN5)
> > > > > > > > ?unsigned int cm_get_qspi_controller_clk_hz(void)
> > > > > > > > ?{
> > > > > > > > ??????uint32_t reg, clock = 0;
> > > > > > > > @@ -556,3 +563,4 @@ U_BOOT_CMD(
> > > > > > > > ??????"display clocks",
> > > > > > > > ??????""
> > > > > > > Why does the clock display not work on S10 ? Are some
> > > > > > > functions
> > > > > > > missing?
> > > > > > Not for SOCVP. But will be added in later stage when
> > > > > > testing
> > > > > > against
> > > > > > emulation
> > > > > How hard would it be to add this missing functionality now ?
> > > > > 
> > > > That will take weeks as that need to be validated as whole in
> > > > emulation
> > > > platform.
> > > You mean printing a few clock information based on some values
> > > from
> > > registers would take weeks ? Why ?
> > > 
> > Oh actually I am referring all the managers code such as full Clock
> > Manager, Reset Manager ... plus testing. Testing is the part take
> > some
> > significant time especially slow when come to emulation.
> Just use empty functions for the clock init code (since it's not
> needed
> on the socvp) and populate the clock reporting functions. That should
> be
> simple, right ?

Can be done but the value won't be meaningful as the register is
uninitialzied. Unless we hardcode to a hard value which might not sound
right.?

Thanks
Chin Liang

> 
> --
> Best regards,
> Marek Vasut
>