Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 20 Apr 2023 13:58:11 +0530
From:   Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@linaro.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
Cc:     Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFT v2 01/14] dt-bindings: clock: qcom,rpmcc: Add a way
 to enable unused clock cleanup
Message-ID: <20230420082811.GA6308@thinkpad>
References: <20230303-topic-rpmcc_sleep-v2-0-ae80a325fe94@linaro.org>
 <20230303-topic-rpmcc_sleep-v2-1-ae80a325fe94@linaro.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20230303-topic-rpmcc_sleep-v2-1-ae80a325fe94@linaro.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Mar 08, 2023 at 10:35:17PM +0100, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> Disabling RPMCC clocks can be a bit touchy. If we can't guarantee all
> (or at least most) of the oneline peripherals ask the interconnect
> framework to keep their buses online and guarantee enough bandwidth,
> we're relying on bootloader defaults to keep the said buses alive through
> RPM requests and rate setting on RPM clocks.
> 
> Without that in place, the RPM clocks are never enabled in the CCF, which
> qualifies them to be cleaned up, since - as far as Linux is concerned -
> nobody's using them and they're just wasting power. Doing so will end
> tragically, as within miliseconds we'll get *some* access attempt on an
> unlocked bus which will cause a platform crash.
> 
> On the other hand, if we want to save power and put well-supported
> platforms to sleep, we should be shutting off at least some of these
> clocks (this time with a clear distinction of which ones are *actually*
> not in use, coming from the interconnect driver).
> 
> To differentiate between these two cases while not breaking older DTs,
> introduce an opt-in property to correctly mark RPM clocks as enabled
> after handoff (the initial max freq vote) and hence qualify them for the
> common unused clock cleanup.
> 

My 2 cents here...

First, this property doesn't belong in DT at all as it is OS specific handling.
This leaves us with the option of using a cmdline or module params for rmpcc.
But we already have one (clk_ignore_unused), so the platforms making use of old
DTB's should use that instead.

And that get's rid of the debate that when you start disabling rpmcc clocks, old
platforms will break. I don't see a valid point to keep the old platforms alive
since their DTB (firmware) is broken already. So either they have to fix the DTB
or use a cmdline option.

- Mani

> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.yaml | 6 ++++++
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.yaml
> index 2a95bf8664f9..386153f61971 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/qcom,rpmcc.yaml
> @@ -58,6 +58,12 @@ properties:
>      minItems: 1
>      maxItems: 2
>  
> +  qcom,clk-disable-unused:
> +    type: boolean
> +    description:
> +      Indicates whether unused RPM clocks can be shut down with the common
> +      unused clock cleanup. Requires a functional interconnect driver.
> +
>  required:
>    - compatible
>    - '#clock-cells'
> 
> -- 
> 2.39.2
> 

-- 
மணிவண்ணன் சதாசிவம்