Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:5 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:5;
Message-ID: <b983e5e4-9a70-4e50-9d32-234cd5c47f66@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 29 Sep 2023 16:52:20 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] arm64: dts: qcom: sc7280: Add Camera Control
 Interface busses
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@linaro.org>,
        Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>,
        Luca Weiss <luca.weiss@fairphone.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@linaro.org>,
        Robert Foss <rfoss@kernel.org>,
        Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@kernel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>,
        cros-qcom-dts-watchers@chromium.org
Cc:     ~postmarketos/upstreaming@lists.sr.ht, phone-devel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <20230929-sc7280-cci-v1-0-16c7d386f062@fairphone.com>
 <20230929-sc7280-cci-v1-2-16c7d386f062@fairphone.com>
 <8dd470e5-ce33-3d33-98f1-e66935ca7b56@linaro.org>
 <1b5bd391-4bb0-44ac-88d1-e326bec4dd7d@nexus-software.ie>
 <acc606a6-c46c-43f5-86e0-84bf876001dd@linaro.org>
 <db5d00b5-5d18-4144-88c2-ff6cfb8c176a@linaro.org>
 <b6f801fc-1d8b-420b-a439-ea0cdd12f7f6@linaro.org>
From:   Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
In-Reply-To: <b6f801fc-1d8b-420b-a439-ea0cdd12f7f6@linaro.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 29/09/2023 16:25, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> Not actually a required clock for the clock controller.
>>
>> I suspect the same is true for dispcc and videocc though it would also mean the respective drivers would need to switch on <&gcc DISPx_CAMERA_AHB_CLK> or <&gcc GCC_VIDEO_AHB_CLK> prior to accessing registers inside the ip blocks which may not currently be the case.
>>
>> Feels like a bit of a contrary answer but my reading is the GCC_IPBLOCK_AHB_CLK clocks belong in the drivers not the clock controllers..  or at least that's true for sm8250/camcc
> I believe the idea here would be that registering GCC_IP_AHB_CLK
> as a pm_clk for the clock controller would make that clock turn
> on when IPBLOCK_CC is accessed (e.g. when we turn on
> IPBLOCK_CORE_CLK), so that it doesn't need to be duplicated in
> each and every end device.
> 
> Konrad

Yeah I mean I accept the logic - the core AHB clock is effectively gated 
by the ipblockcc even though they originate from different places in 
hardware - and _when_ do you want one clock without the other ? Never 
except at probe() time for the ipblockcc.

Then again if you can show the clock dependency tree of camera or disp 
requires GCC_IP_AHB_CLK you could make the argument the dt requires the 
clock dependency defined in that block.

I'd say we should offline this from Luca's patches tho :) for me anyway 
the first two are fine.

Agree #3 is verboten. No new empty nodes.

---
bod