Received: by 2002:a25:ad19:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id y25csp461414ybi; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:37:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwQ+4j4mkaHE26E+pYbIQdcHSFGqct27HL7hbF2XT4CzYr8g34xW4UV9FInnVdBjZc+mbTz X-Received: by 2002:a63:221f:: with SMTP id i31mr40216905pgi.251.1563345455000; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:37:35 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1563345454; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=GSuexYvJFotKRGjvGrlZp+aQwC8DNaA6H7A6Q+KxGBdRiUjGs4AkxNV8eQ//Cx2yBN 3cOBIXafFurSbxrpyPDPFt9SEQq+9CWi/wu1VcgMxQmIR/MciW9cjtet6FgwjepJi2GS ugfsDjnQ0z9lQ+lT/j6RvWCTYgX6wdIBW5mgnRGJEldNzW1lkJg9nP/lBpbDZz1S7hFi Aw/B398Fq406nV+Kohjgq0iSSSYN2tmBYFFT38fXf3zlYTEEVchOWfRyL7nXCKKHpQMf uURhCCMPchIz7sU9ncJwDy4DcAfhqBtwAK/VppHLZ2xPCObK/1OJKqJAg+v7uwBDkn+M gcEg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:dkim-signature:content-language :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject; bh=8yms5xUyRih0XJUJDROcOyetntkoA3KpMz1e+L2kFNw=; b=LoPgxLTsg5KkKuTE69+Nu1JhkyiQK6pQTYQeFBkZJgXUxQM2U5Q5Wx1zbtOHalM7Uh VmjPv4xrFFL9NPUend+XokmjIbPhSTmGZMBVk8F8+2DGxnLnlitPWU1fsEPnofrjsl7g 3rd1x0azDWAjVSiXENA7ZD1IQVeXPMGJ5b88s+XqKKT3TH4DXunLVbz2S8ajDun0sYHp X+NlcRW54lkjP7aiuK7Hs7FUeX6g40SIgkdzzbTgd0zrTTevr+PmgvZGloPYJwJBbF/3 dXj7E7IcQ2mB0J5ypvwjLE4G33vhQTvl9WqE2D2lTqUQcWxhIFqGNEv4z6l71MWcoIMf lCWg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@nvidia.com header.s=n1 header.b=eswYOQP3; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=nvidia.com Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id g14si22781321pgh.98.2019.07.16.23.37.18; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:37:34 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@nvidia.com header.s=n1 header.b=eswYOQP3; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=nvidia.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727585AbfGQGgn (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 17 Jul 2019 02:36:43 -0400 Received: from hqemgate14.nvidia.com ([216.228.121.143]:14739 "EHLO hqemgate14.nvidia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725873AbfGQGgm (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jul 2019 02:36:42 -0400 Received: from hqpgpgate101.nvidia.com (Not Verified[216.228.121.13]) by hqemgate14.nvidia.com (using TLS: TLSv1.2, DES-CBC3-SHA) id ; Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:36:36 -0700 Received: from hqmail.nvidia.com ([172.20.161.6]) by hqpgpgate101.nvidia.com (PGP Universal service); Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:36:36 -0700 X-PGP-Universal: processed; by hqpgpgate101.nvidia.com on Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:36:36 -0700 Received: from [10.2.164.12] (10.124.1.5) by HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 17 Jul 2019 06:36:35 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 11/18] clk: tegra210: Add support for Tegra210 clocks To: Dmitry Osipenko CC: Peter De Schrijver , Joseph Lo , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , References: <72b5df8c-8acb-d0d0-ebcf-b406e8404973@nvidia.com> <2b701832-5548-7c83-7c17-05cc2f1470c8@nvidia.com> <76e341be-6f38-2bc1-048e-1aa6883f9b88@gmail.com> <0706576a-ce61-1cf3-bed1-05f54a1e2489@nvidia.com> <5b2945c5-fcb2-2ac0-2bf2-df869dc9c713@gmail.com> <27641e30-fdd1-e53a-206d-71e1f23343fd@gmail.com> <10c4b9a2-a857-d124-c22d-7fd71a473079@nvidia.com> <0ee06d1a-310d-59f7-0aa6-b688b33447f5@nvidia.com> <707c4679-fde6-1714-ced0-dcf7ca8380a9@nvidia.com> <055457fd-621b-6c93-b671-d5e5380698c6@nvidia.com> <20190717071105.3750a021@dimatab> <77df234f-aa40-0319-a593-f1f19f0f1c2a@nvidia.com> <20190717084221.2e9af56c@dimatab> <093462f3-8c6d-d084-9822-ae4eff041c64@nvidia.com> <20190717093317.70fefb27@dimatab> From: Sowjanya Komatineni Message-ID: <6e73dcee-6e24-b646-97a4-4b34aedd231d@nvidia.com> Date: Tue, 16 Jul 2019 23:36:33 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.7.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190717093317.70fefb27@dimatab> X-Originating-IP: [10.124.1.5] X-ClientProxiedBy: HQMAIL101.nvidia.com (172.20.187.10) To HQMAIL107.nvidia.com (172.20.187.13) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-US DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nvidia.com; s=n1; t=1563345397; bh=8yms5xUyRih0XJUJDROcOyetntkoA3KpMz1e+L2kFNw=; h=X-PGP-Universal:Subject:To:CC:References:From:Message-ID:Date: User-Agent:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:X-Originating-IP: X-ClientProxiedBy:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Language; b=eswYOQP3sbxd2marMblNU57dFGTdDGphnGpuYuQ+8sUxraQQaawUh6bttTaPFWgk/ 8e6RfZ1jxXEOIMPsr1MPIOYqY24mCrb3xeekqF2b8L6GOVJIHjSsep7ITpd3C5nx2U W+NpdUwrV4XVoSIdUQblQl2yblM+ER7xHEI/sy5WEHnNi3q3OQMb4HPg2gbOJs4QQK kDwzyFxmZjXJ21Q15uvWI5PRR3s5pBYu0o4UTYcXkxfMY4mB+8qZhIjybXH+9I8ToL GGKVe2KplI4wKMJs14lJkBNH4TMTGpQZyhJHnSJ21PKACxx2xdHsbsvEAVdb52v26e 5r4/kAmbApDCg== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 7/16/19 11:33 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > =D0=92 Tue, 16 Jul 2019 22:55:52 -0700 > Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1= =82: > >> On 7/16/19 10:42 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>> =D0=92 Tue, 16 Jul 2019 22:25:25 -0700 >>> Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5= =D1=82: >>> =20 >>>> On 7/16/19 9:11 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>> =D0=92 Tue, 16 Jul 2019 19:35:49 -0700 >>>>> Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5= =D1=82: >>>>> =20 >>>>>> On 7/16/19 7:18 PM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote: >>>>>>> On 7/16/19 3:06 PM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 3:00 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>> 17.07.2019 0:35, Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1= =82: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 2:21 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> 17.07.2019 0:12, Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5= =D1=82: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 1:47 PM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 22:26, Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0= =B5=D1=82: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 11:43 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 21:30, Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88=D0= =B5=D1=82: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 11:25 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 21:19, Sowjanya Komatineni =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1=88= =D0=B5=D1=82: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 9:50 AM, Sowjanya Komatineni wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/16/19 8:00 AM, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 16.07.2019 11:06, Peter De Schrijver =D0=BF=D0=B8=D1= =88=D0=B5=D1=82: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 03:24:26PM +0800, Joseph >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lo wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OK, Will add to CPUFreq driver... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The other thing that also need attention is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that T124 CPUFreq >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driver >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> implicitly relies on DFLL driver to be probed >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> first, which is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> icky. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Should I add check for successful dfll clk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> register explicitly in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPUFreq driver probe and defer till dfll clk >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> registers? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably you should use the "device links". See >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1][2] for the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> example. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.2.1/source/drivers= /gpu/drm/tegra/dc.c#L2383 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/driver-api/devi= ce_link.html >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Return EPROBE_DEFER instead of EINVAL if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> device_link_add() fails. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use of_find_device_by_node() to get the DFLL's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> device, see [3]. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [3] >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/l= inux-next.git/tree/drivers/devfreq/tegra20-devfreq.c#n100 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will go thru and add... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Looks like I initially confused this case with getting >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> orphaned clock. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm now seeing that the DFLL driver registers the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock and then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clk_get(dfll) should be returning EPROBE_DEFER until >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL driver is >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probed, hence everything should be fine as-is and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> there is no real >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for the 'device link'. Sorry for the confusion! >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, I didn't follow the mail thread. Just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regarding the DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> part. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As you know it, the DFLL clock is one of the CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock sources and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> integrated with DVFS control logic with the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regulator. We will not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU to other clock sources once we switched to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL. Because the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU has >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> been regulated by the DFLL HW with the DVFS table >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (CVB or OPP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> table >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you see >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in the driver.). We shouldn't reparent it to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other sources with >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unknew >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> freq/volt pair. That's not guaranteed to work. We >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> allow switching to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> open-loop mode but different sources. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay, then the CPUFreq driver will have to enforce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL freq to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rate before switching to PLLP in order to have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper CPU voltage. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP freq is safe to work for any CPU voltage. So no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to enforce >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL freq to PLLP rate before changing CCLK_G source >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to PLLP during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sorry, please ignore my above comment. During >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend, need to change >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CCLK_G source to PLLP when dfll is in closed loop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mode first and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dfll need to be set to open loop. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And I don't exactly understand why we need to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> switch to PLLP in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> idle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driver. Just keep it on CL-DVFS mode all the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In SC7 entry, the dfll suspend function moves it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the open-loop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mode. That's >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all. The sc7-entryfirmware will handle the rest >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of the sequence to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn off >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the CPU power. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In SC7 resume, the warmboot code will handle the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sequence to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> turn on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> regulator and power up the CPU cluster. And leave >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it on PLL_P. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> After >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resuming to the kernel, we re-init DFLL, restore >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the CPU clock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> policy (CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> runs on DFLL open-loop mode) and then moving to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> close-loop mode. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The DFLL is re-inited after switching CCLK to DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parent during of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> early clocks-state restoring by CaR driver. Hence >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of having >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> odd >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hacks in the CaR driver, it is much nicer to have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proper suspend-resume sequencing of the device >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> drivers. In this case >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPUFreq >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> driver is the driver that enables DFLL and switches >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU to that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source, which means that this driver is also should >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be responsible for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> management of the DFLL's state during of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend/resume process. If >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPUFreq driver disables DFLL during suspend and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> re-enables it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resume, then looks like the CaR driver hacks around >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> DFLL are not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> needed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The DFLL part looks good to me. BTW, change the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> patch subject to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Add >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspend-resume support" seems more appropriate to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> me. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To clarify this, the sequences for DFLL use are as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> follows (assuming >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> required DFLL hw configuration has been done) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Switch to DFLL: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0) Save current parent and frequency >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Program DFLL to open loop mode >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2) Enable DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 3) Change cclk_g parent to DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For OVR regulator: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Change PWM output pin from tristate to output >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 5) Enable DFLL PWM output >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For I2C regulator: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 4) Enable DFLL I2C output >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 6) Program DFLL to closed loop mode >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Switch away from DFLL: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 0) Change cclk_g parent to PLLP so the CPU >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> frequency is ok for >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> vdd_cpu voltage >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1) Program DFLL to open loop mode >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see during switch away from DFLL (suspend), cclk_g >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> parent is not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> changed to PLLP before changing dfll to open loop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mode. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Will add this ... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The CPUFreq driver switches parent to PLLP during the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> probe, similar >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be done on suspend. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm also wondering if it's always safe to switch to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP in the probe. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If CPU is running on a lower freq than PLLP, then some >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate intermediate parent should be selected. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =20 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> CPU parents are PLL_X, PLL_P, and dfll. PLL_X always >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> runs at higher >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rate >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so switching to PLL_P during CPUFreq probe prior to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dfll clock enable >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be safe. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> AFAIK, PLLX could run at ~200MHz. There is also a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> divided output of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which CCLKG supports, the PLLP_OUT4. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Probably, realistically, CPU is always running off a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fast PLLX during >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> boot, but I'm wondering what may happen on KEXEC. I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> guess ideally CPUFreq driver should also have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 'shutdown' callback to teardown DFLL >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on a reboot, but likely that there are other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> clock-related problems as >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> well that may break KEXEC and thus it is not very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important at the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> moment. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [snip] >>>>>>>>>>>>>> During bootup CPUG sources from PLL_X. By PLL_P source >>>>>>>>>>>>>> above I meant >>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLL_P_OUT4. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As per clock policies, PLL_X is always used for high freq >>>>>>>>>>>>>> like >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 800Mhz >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and for low frequency it will be sourced from PLLP. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Alright, then please don't forget to pre-initialize >>>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP_OUT4 rate to a >>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable value using tegra_clk_init_table or >>>>>>>>>>>>> assigned-clocks. >>>>>>>>>>>> PLLP_OUT4 rate update is not needed as it is safe to run at >>>>>>>>>>>> 408Mhz because it is below fmax @ Vmin >>>>>>>>>>> So even 204MHz CVB entries are having the same voltage as >>>>>>>>>>> 408MHz, correct? It's not instantly obvious to me from the >>>>>>>>>>> DFLL driver's code where the fmax @ Vmin is defined, I see >>>>>>>>>>> that there is the min_millivolts >>>>>>>>>>> and frequency entries starting from 204MHZ defined >>>>>>>>>>> per-table. >>>>>>>>>> Yes at Vmin CPU Fmax is ~800Mhz. So anything below that will >>>>>>>>>> work at Vmin voltage and PLLP max is 408Mhz. >>>>>>>>> Thank you for the clarification. It would be good to have that >>>>>>>>> commented >>>>>>>>> in the code as well. >>>>>>>> OK, Will add... >>>>>>> Regarding, adding suspend/resume to CPUFreq, CPUFreq suspend >>>>>>> happens very early even before disabling non-boot CPUs and also >>>>>>> need to export clock driver APIs to CPUFreq. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Was thinking of below way of implementing this... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Clock DFLL driver Suspend: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - Save CPU clock policy re= gisters, and Perform dfll >>>>>>> suspend which sets in open loop mode >>>>>>> >>>>>>> CPU Freq driver Suspend: does nothing >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Clock DFLL driver Resume: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - Re-init DFLL, Set in Ope= n-Loop mode, restore CPU >>>>>>> Clock policy registers which actually sets source to DFLL along >>>>>>> with other CPU Policy register restore. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> CPU Freq driver Resume: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 - do clk_prepare_enable wh= ich acutally sets DFLL in >>>>>>> Closed loop mode >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Adding one more note: Switching CPU Clock to PLLP is not needed >>>>>>> as CPU CLock can be from dfll in open-loop mode as DFLL is not >>>>>>> disabled anywhere throught the suspend/resume path and SC7 entry >>>>>>> FW and Warm boot code will switch CPU source to PLLP. >>>>> Since CPU resumes on PLLP, it will be cleaner to suspend it on >>>>> PLLP as well. And besides, seems that currently disabling DFLL >>>>> clock will disable DFLL completely and then you'd want to re-init >>>>> the DFLL on resume any ways. So better to just disable DFLL >>>>> completely on suspend, which should happen on clk_disable(dfll). >>>> Will switch to PLLP during CPUFreq suspend. With decision of using >>>> clk_disable during suspend, its mandatory to switch to PLLP as DFLL >>>> is completely disabled. >>>> >>>> My earlier concern was on restoring CPU policy as we can't do that >>>> from CPUFreq driver and need export from clock driver. >>>> >>>> Clear now and will do CPU clock policy restore in after dfll >>>> re-init. >>> Why the policy can't be saved/restored by the CaR driver as a >>> context of any other clock? >> restoring cpu clock policy involves programming source and >> super_cclkg_divider. >> >> cclk_g is registered as clk_super_mux and it doesn't use frac_div ops >> to do save/restore its divider. > That can be changed of course and I guess it also could be as simple as > saving and restoring of two raw u32 values of the policy/divider > registers. > >> Also, during clock context we cant restore cclk_g as cclk_g source >> will be dfll and dfll will not be resumed/re-initialized by the time >> clk_super_mux save/restore happens. >> >> we can't use save/restore context for dfll clk_ops because >> dfllCPU_out parent to CCLK_G is first in the clock tree and dfll_ref >> and dfll_soc peripheral clocks are not restored by the time dfll >> restore happens. Also dfll peripheral clock enables need to be >> restored before dfll restore happens which involves programming dfll >> controller for re-initialization. >> >> So dfll resume/re-init is done in clk-tegra210 at end of all clocks >> restore in V5 series but instead of in clk-tegra210 driver I moved >> now to dfll-fcpu driver pm_ops as all dfll dependencies will be >> restored thru clk_restore_context by then. This will be in V6. > Since DFLL is now guaranteed to be disabled across CaR suspend/resume > (hence it has nothing to do in regards to CCLK) and given that PLLs > state is restored before the rest of the clocks, I don't see why not to > implement CCLK save/restore in a generic fasion. CPU policy wull be > restored to either PLLP or PLLX (if CPUFreq driver is disabled). > CCLK_G save/restore should happen in clk_super_mux ops save/context and=20 clk_super_mux save/restore happens very early as cclk_g is first in the=20 clock tree and save/restore traverses through the tree top-bottom order. DFLL enable thru CPUFreq resume happens after all clk_restore_context=20 happens. So during clk_restore_context, dfll re-init doesnt happen and=20 doing cpu clock policy restore during super_mux clk_ops will crash as=20 DFLL is not initialized and its clock is not enabled but CPU clock=20 restore sets source to DFLL if we restore during super_clk_mux