On 17/06/16 17:18, Thierry Reding wrote:

* PGP Signed by an unknown key

On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 01:03:38PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:

quoted

For Tegra210 the 'sor-safe' clock needs to be enabled when using DPAUX.
Add support to the DPAUX driver for enabling this clock on Tegra210.

Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@nvidia.com>
---
 drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/dpaux.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/dpaux.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/dpaux.c
index aa3a037fcd3b..d696a7e45935 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/dpaux.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/tegra/dpaux.c

@@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ struct tegra_dpaux {
 
 	struct reset_control *rst;
 	struct clk *clk_parent;
+	struct clk *clk_sor;

Can we call this "clk_safe", please? On one hand that mirrors the name
of the clock in the binding and on the other hand it avoids confusion
with the real SOR clock.

OK.

quoted

 	struct clk *clk;
 
 	struct regulator *vdd;

@@ -340,18 +341,37 @@ static int tegra_dpaux_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 		return PTR_ERR(dpaux->rst);
 	}
 
+	if (of_device_is_compatible(pdev->dev.of_node,
+				    "nvidia,tegra210-dpaux")) {
+		dpaux->clk_sor = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, "sor-safe");
+		if (IS_ERR(dpaux->clk_sor)) {
+			dev_err(&pdev->dev,
+				"failed to get sor-safe clock: %ld\n",
+				PTR_ERR(dpaux->clk_sor));
+			return PTR_ERR(dpaux->clk_sor);
+		}
+
+		err = clk_prepare_enable(dpaux->clk_sor);
+		if (err < 0) {
+			dev_err(&pdev->dev,
+				"failed to enable sor-safe clock: %d\n", err);
+			return err;
+		}
+	}

Please make this part of a struct tegra_dpaux_soc, so that we don't have
to check the compatible string again here. This could look like:

	struct tegra_dpaux_soc {
		bool needs_safe_clock;
	};

	static const struct tegra_dpaux_soc tegra124_dpaux_soc = {
		.needs_safe_clock = false,
	};

	static const struct tegra_dpaux_soc tegra210_dpaux_soc = {
		.needs_safe_clock = true,
	};

	...

	static const struct of_device_id tegra_dpaux_of_match[] = {
		{ .compatible = "nvidia,tegra210-dpaux", .data = &tegra210_dpaux_soc },
		{ .compatible = "nvidia,tegra124-dpaux", .data = &tegra124_dpaux_soc },
		{ },
	};

OK. I wonder if we should call it 'has_safe_clock' because this clock
does not exist for tegra124 AFAICT. #bikeshed ;-)

quoted

@@ -434,6 +454,9 @@ disable_parent_clk:
 assert_reset:
 	reset_control_assert(dpaux->rst);
 	clk_disable_unprepare(dpaux->clk);
+disable_sor_clk:
+	if (dpaux->clk_sor)
+		clk_disable_unprepare(dpaux->clk_sor);

You can drop the extra check here, since the common clock framework
ignores NULL or ERR_PTR() pointers.

OK.

quoted

 
 	return err;
 }

@@ -456,6 +479,8 @@ static int tegra_dpaux_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 	clk_disable_unprepare(dpaux->clk_parent);
 	reset_control_assert(dpaux->rst);
 	clk_disable_unprepare(dpaux->clk);
+	if (dpaux->clk_sor)
+		clk_disable_unprepare(dpaux->clk_sor);

Same here.

OK.

Cheers
Jon

-- 
nvpublic
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel