Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <e54b4f62dbcd670a0e0658598e045051@codeaurora.org>
References: <1628568516-24155-1-git-send-email-pmaliset@codeaurora.org>
 <1628568516-24155-5-git-send-email-pmaliset@codeaurora.org>
 <349b1178f071407dfad8ba3050482772@codeaurora.org> <e54b4f62dbcd670a0e0658598e045051@codeaurora.org>
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@chromium.org>
User-Agent: alot/0.9.1
Date:   Wed, 25 Aug 2021 19:30:09 +0000
Message-ID: <CAE-0n50cnWf_3LQ6P9KMaT4dnryWW9JemP95JDZt5WE1G4mZuQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 4/4] PCI: qcom: Switch pcie_1_pipe_clk_src after PHY
 init in SC7280
To:     Prasad Malisetty <pmaliset@codeaurora.org>, agross@kernel.org,
        bhelgaas@google.com, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
        lorenzo.pieralisi@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, svarbanov@mm-sol.com
Cc:     devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        dianders@chromium.org, mka@chromium.org, vbadigan@codeaurora.org,
        sallenki@codeaurora.org, manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

Quoting Prasad Malisetty (2021-08-24 01:10:48)
> On 2021-08-17 22:56, Prasad Malisetty wrote:
> > On 2021-08-10 09:38, Prasad Malisetty wrote:
> >> On the SC7280, By default the clock source for pcie_1_pipe is
> >> TCXO for gdsc enable. But after the PHY is initialized, the clock
> >> source must be switched to gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk from TCXO.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Prasad Malisetty <pmaliset@codeaurora.org>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++
> >>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> >> b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> >> index 8a7a300..39e3b21 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-qcom.c
> >> @@ -166,6 +166,8 @@ struct qcom_pcie_resources_2_7_0 {
> >>      struct regulator_bulk_data supplies[2];
> >>      struct reset_control *pci_reset;
> >>      struct clk *pipe_clk;
> >> +    struct clk *gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src;
> >> +    struct clk *phy_pipe_clk;
> >>  };
> >>
> >>  union qcom_pcie_resources {
> >> @@ -1167,6 +1169,16 @@ static int qcom_pcie_get_resources_2_7_0(struct
> >> qcom_pcie *pcie)
> >>      if (ret < 0)
> >>              return ret;
> >>
> >> +    if (of_device_is_compatible(dev->of_node, "qcom,pcie-sc7280")) {
> >> +            res->gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src = devm_clk_get(dev, "pipe_mux");
> >> +            if (IS_ERR(res->gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src))
> >> +                    return PTR_ERR(res->gcc_pcie_1_pipe_clk_src);
> >> +
> >> +            res->phy_pipe_clk = devm_clk_get(dev, "phy_pipe");
> >> +            if (IS_ERR(res->phy_pipe_clk))
> >> +                    return PTR_ERR(res->phy_pipe_clk);
> >> +    }
> >> +
> >
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Greetings!
> >
> > I would like to check is there any other better approach instead of
> > compatible method here as well or is it fine to use compatible method.
> >

I'd prefer the compatible method. If nobody is responding then it's best
to just resend the patches with the approach you prefer instead of
waiting for someone to respond to a review comment.