Thread (3 messages) 3 messages, 2 authors, 2019-06-28

Re: [RFC] clk: imx8mm: Add dram freq switch support

From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Date: 2019-06-27 21:14:55
Also in: linux-clk, linux-pm

Quoting Leonard Crestez (2019-05-30 00:13:51)
Add a wrapper clock encapsulating dram frequency switch support for
imx8m chips. This allows higher-level DVFS code to manipulate dram
frequency using standard clock framework APIs.

Linux-side implementation is similar in principle to imx_clk_cpu or a
composite clock. Only some preparation is done inside the kernel, the
actual freq switch is performed from TF-A code which runs from an SRAM
area. Cores other than the one performing the switch are also made to
spin inside TF-A by sending each an IRQ.

This is an early proof-of-concept which only support low/high mode on
imx8mm but NXP has secure-world dram freq switching implementations for
multiple other chips and this approach can be extended.

This was tested using a large pile of NXP out-of-tree patches. Code for
the "busfreq core" from last release can be seen here:
https://source.codeaurora.org/external/imx/linux-imx/tree/drivers/soc/imx/busfreq-imx8mq.c?h=imx_4.14.98_2.0.0_ga

It can be likely made to work with interconnect RFC:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/cover/10851705/

This RFC effectively refactors a common part between them.

Among the possible cleanups:
 * Handle errors in low/high busfreq code and back off
 * Move irq to secure world
 * Try to use fewer clk parameters
 * More chips and frequencies

Many platforms handle this kind of stuff externally but cpufreq is quite
insistent that actual rates are set by clk code and that new platforms
use cpufreq-dt.

Let me know if there are objections to handling dram freq via clk.
Can it be an interconnect driver instead? I don't see how this is a clk
driver. It looks more like a driver that itself manages a collection of
clks, and you've put the coordination of those clks behind the clk_ops
interface. We don't want to have clk_ops calling clk consumer APIs in
general, so the whole approach doesn't seem correct. Hopefully this can
work out as some other sort of driver that is used directly from devfreq
or interconnect core instead and then have a different consumer driver
of devfreq or interconnect core that knows how to drive the clk tree.


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help