On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 02:05:12PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:

On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 03:42:52PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:

quoted

On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 10:51:09AM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:

quoted

On Wed, Dec 06, 2023 at 06:40:09PM +0530, Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:

quoted

OK. How about, "qcom,broken-refclk"? This reflects the fact that the default
refclk operation is broken on this platform, so the OS should be prepared for
it (by keeping it always on).

Shouldn't that be

	qcom,broken-clkreq

since its the CLKREQ# signal used to request REFCLK that is broken, not
the REFCLK itself?

Darn... You are right. I got carried away by the initial property name. Thanks
for spotting!

Thinking some more on this after hitting send: It may still be wrong
with a 'broken-clkreq' property in the PHY instead of in the controller
(or endpoint).

Could there not be other ways to handle a broken clkreq signal so that
this really should be a decision made by the OS, for example, to disable
L1 substates and clock PM?

One has to weigh the power consumption between keeping refclk always on and
disabling L1SS. Chaitanya, can you measure power consumption in both cases?

Simply leaving the refclk always on in the PHY seems like a bit of a
hack and I'm not even sure that can be considered correct.

I wouldn't agree it is a hack, even though it may sound like one. The option to
keep refclk always on in the PHY is precisely there for usecase like this.

- Mani

Having a property that maps directly to that behaviour has rightly been
rejected, but it seems that simply renaming the flag but keeping it in
the PHY may still not be the right thing to do here.

Johan

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்

-- 
linux-phy mailing list
linux-phy@lists.infradead.org
https://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-phy