Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 4 authors, 2015-08-28

[RESEND PATCH v16 4/4] ARM: dts: add the support power-domain node on RK3288 SoCs

From: mturquette@baylibre.com (Michael Turquette)
Date: 2015-08-28 22:53:54
Also in: linux-devicetree, linux-rockchip, lkml

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

Quoting Doug Anderson (2015-08-28 14:08:52)
Mike,

On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 1:02 PM, Michael Turquette
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi Doug,

Quoting Doug Anderson (2015-08-27 19:03:20)
quoted
Kevin,

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 5:24 PM, Kevin Hilman [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
That is not really workable: the attach and detach happen in
probe/remove path; if you do not have driver for the device you will
miss the clocks for it.
And in my proposal, I suggested that clocks without drivers are
good candidates to list in the domain, with the caveat that the be
called out (documented) as being device clocks that are missing a
driver, so when a driver shows up they can be moved accordingly, and in
a way that actually describes the hardware.
What happens if someone disables the driver using the CONFIG subsystem?
Kevin asked me to chime in on this thread, as I have a half-baked idea
that might solve the problem posed by your question above.

One thing I have been considering for a while is a fallback compatible
string that can be used for an IP block when either there is no driver
loaded or no driver exists at all. Something like "generic-ip-block".

The purpose of this compatible string is to allow us to model resource
consumption in dts accurately, regardless of whether or not a proper
driver has been written in Linux. This idea was born out of the
simple-fb binding/driver discussion last year[0].

Obviously such a binding would not enable any of the logic or function
of that IP block; that would require a proper driver. But it would allow
us to properly link system-wide resources that are consumed: the
generic-ip could consume clocks and regulators, it could belong to power
domains, etc. For this reason I have also thought that
"generic-resource-consumer" is an accurate compatible string.

This spares us from having to encode nasty details into the power domain
binding, which is exactly what would happen if you needed a dedicated
list of clocks in the power domain node that were not claimed by device
nodes/drivers.

Note that a real driver might exist for an IP block, but if that driver
is disabled in Kconfig AND the corresponding dt node has this fallback
compatible string, then we could be OK, from the perspective of the
power domain problem.
OK, so that could solve the "Kconfig" problem.

quoted
quoted
What happens if this is a device that someone has set to 'status =
"disabled";' in the device tree?
If someone does that, then I think we should let that break power domain
transitions.
So if you're on a board that doesn't use EDP but uses LVDS then their
suspend/resume should be broken?

Specifically, it's my understanding that on this SoC:

1. There's a single "video IO" power domain that contains things like
the video output processor, EDP, LVDS, HDMI, etc.

2. When you turn on/off the power domain it's important to clock all
devices in the domain during the reset.

3. If you don't clock all devices during the reset they get left in a
"wedged" state.

4. If you try to do things like suspend/resume it will query all
devices.  If they've been left in the wedged state then suspend/resume
will be blocked.

...so this problem is still not solved.
I talked to Kevin about this and we both agree that the power domain's
use of the clock consumer binding is totally valid. So I still think
there might be a use for the generic-ip binding, but I also think the
solution in this original patch also looks sane.

A paraphrase of my discussion with Kevin is that we can think of both
the device (EDP, LVDS) and the power domain as clock consumers, so
basically there is nothing weird going on here. Feel free to add:

Reviewed-by: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>

I do also agree with Kevin that we have a lot of layering issues to
consider here with description of PM hardware, and there are temptations
to take the shortest route to get things working. Truly modeling
relationships is the best way forward and we need to keep that in mind
over the long haul.
quoted
quoted
Even if the device is disabled in one of those two ways, we still need
the clocks to be turned on.  ...so if we turn on/off the VIO domain we
need to turn on the EDP clock even if there's no EDP in the current
board / config.  We might turn on/off VIO for one of the other devices
in the VIO domain for one of the other devices in VIO that we are
using.
I'm hesitant to mention this but I am working on a patch series to
implement a clock "handoff" mechanism (also inspired by the simplefb
discussion). This allows us to set a per-clock flag that tells the
framework to enable that clock at registration time, and then the first
clock consumer driver to come along and claim that clock inherits that
clock enable reference count.

I'm working on v2 that lets us set this flag from DT, but I really only
plan to do this for special cases. For the normal case the flag should
be set in the Linux clock provider driver. In the mean time v1 is under
discussion[1].
In this case if we're using LVDS and HDMI on a system, we don't want
the EDP clock always on (that just wastes power).  We just need to
clock it for the power domain transition.


Note that nothing in the above solves the problem that not all clocks
for a given device need to be turned on during power domain
transitions.  If we're trying to describe hardware perfectly, we'd
really need to add to each device:

clocks = <clk1>, <clk2>, <clk3>, ...
clock-names = "name1", "name2", "name3", ...
clocks-for-power-domain-transition = "name2", "name3";

...since perhaps the clock named "name1" isn't required for power
domain transitions and so shouldn't be turned on.  Note that once
we're going through and adding a special list, it doesn't seem that
different than just adding the list in the power domain node instead
(other than being more complex).
Yes, this is a broader issue with mapping clocks onto consumer use
cases. The same is exactly true for any consumer driver that consumes
multiple clocks and enables/disables them differently (e.g. interface
clocks versus functional clocks). How to convey that in DT?

Regards,
Mike
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help