Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756756AbcKBR7s (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2016 13:59:48 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:34162 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756290AbcKBR7q (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Nov 2016 13:59:46 -0400 DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.1 smtp.codeaurora.org DB5CF6156D Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; dmarc=none header.from=codeaurora.org Authentication-Results: pdx-caf-mail.web.codeaurora.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sboyd@codeaurora.org Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2016 10:59:44 -0700 From: "'Stephen Boyd'" To: Sricharan Cc: mturquette@baylibre.com, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rnayak@codeaurora.org, stanimir.varbanov@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] clk: qcom: gdsc: Add support for gdscs with HW control Message-ID: <20161102175944.GI16026@codeaurora.org> References: <1477304297-5248-1-git-send-email-sricharan@codeaurora.org> <1477304297-5248-2-git-send-email-sricharan@codeaurora.org> <20161102001834.GB16026@codeaurora.org> <003c01d234d5$731b19c0$59514d40$@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <003c01d234d5$731b19c0$59514d40$@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1380 Lines: 38 On 11/02, Sricharan wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > >On 10/24, Sricharan R wrote: > >> @@ -164,6 +171,10 @@ static int gdsc_enable(struct generic_pm_domain *domain) > >> */ > >> udelay(1); > >> > >> + /* Turn on HW trigger mode if supported */ > >> + if (sc->flags & HW_CTRL) > >> + gdsc_hwctrl(sc, true); > >> + > > > >It sounds like this will cause glitches if the hardware isn't > >asserting their hw control bit by default? This has me concerned > >that we can't just throw the hw control enable part into here, > >because that bit doesn't live in the clock controller, instead it > >lives in the hw block that is powered by the power domain? > > > >Or does the power on reset value of that hw control signal > >asserted? If that's true then we should be ok to force it into hw > >control mode by default. > > > > The hw control bit is set by default. Instead its turned 'off' > with the reset value. So it has to not > be turned 'on' at some point > to put the gdsc in hw control if required. This bit is part of the > gdscr register. So i did not quite understand the reason for the > glitch here ? I mean the reset value of the hw control signal inside the device that is inside the GDSC power domain. For example, the hw control bit inside the video core. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project