1. Patchew
  2. linux
  3. [PATCH v2 0/7] clks: qcom: Introduce clks for SM8750
  4. View patch

[PATCH v2 2/7] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8750 rpmh clocks

Melody Olvera posted 7 patches 1 year, 2 months ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH v2 2/7] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8750 rpmh clocks
Posted by Melody Olvera 1 year, 2 months ago 
From: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>

Add the RPMH clocks present in SM8750 SoC and fix the match table to
sort it alphabetically.

Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
---
 drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
index eefc322ce367..a3b381e34e48 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
@@ -368,6 +368,10 @@ DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk2, _d, "rfclkd2", 1);
 DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _d, "rfclkd3", 1);
 DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _d, "rfclkd4", 1);
 
+DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _a2, "rfclka3", 2);
+DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _a2, "rfclka4", 2);
+DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk5, _a2, "rfclka5", 2);
+
 DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk1, _a1, "clka1", 1);
 DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk2, _a1, "clka2", 1);
 DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk3, _a1, "clka3", 1);
@@ -807,6 +811,27 @@ static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_x1e80100 = {
 	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(x1e80100_rpmh_clocks),
 };
 
+static struct clk_hw *sm8750_rpmh_clocks[] = {
+	[RPMH_CXO_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2.hw,
+	[RPMH_CXO_CLK_A]	= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2_ao.hw,
+	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2.hw,
+	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2_ao.hw,
+	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2.hw,
+	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2_ao.hw,
+	[RPMH_RF_CLK1]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a.hw,
+	[RPMH_RF_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a_ao.hw,
+	[RPMH_RF_CLK2]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a.hw,
+	[RPMH_RF_CLK2_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a_ao.hw,
+	[RPMH_RF_CLK3]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2.hw,
+	[RPMH_RF_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2_ao.hw,
+	[RPMH_IPA_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_ipa.hw,
+};
+
+static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_sm8750 = {
+	.clks = sm8750_rpmh_clocks,
+	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8750_rpmh_clocks),
+};
+
 static struct clk_hw *of_clk_rpmh_hw_get(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec,
 					 void *data)
 {
@@ -894,6 +919,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sa8775p},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sar2130p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sar2130p},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7180},
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8180x},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8280xp},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sdm845},
@@ -909,7 +935,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8450-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8450},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8550},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8650-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8650},
-	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
+	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8750-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8750},
 	{ .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_x1e80100},
 	{ }
 };
-- 
2.46.1
Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8750 rpmh clocks
Posted by Dmitry Baryshkov 1 year, 2 months ago 
On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Melody Olvera wrote:
> From: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
> 
> Add the RPMH clocks present in SM8750 SoC and fix the match table to
> sort it alphabetically.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
> index eefc322ce367..a3b381e34e48 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
> @@ -368,6 +368,10 @@ DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk2, _d, "rfclkd2", 1);
>  DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _d, "rfclkd3", 1);
>  DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _d, "rfclkd4", 1);
>  
> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _a2, "rfclka3", 2);
> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _a2, "rfclka4", 2);
> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk5, _a2, "rfclka5", 2);

Are the two last clocks defined "for the future platforms"?

> +
>  DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk1, _a1, "clka1", 1);
>  DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk2, _a1, "clka2", 1);
>  DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk3, _a1, "clka3", 1);
> @@ -807,6 +811,27 @@ static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_x1e80100 = {
>  	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(x1e80100_rpmh_clocks),
>  };
>  
> +static struct clk_hw *sm8750_rpmh_clocks[] = {
> +	[RPMH_CXO_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2.hw,
> +	[RPMH_CXO_CLK_A]	= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2_ao.hw,
> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2.hw,
> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2_ao.hw,
> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2.hw,
> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2_ao.hw,
> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK1]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a.hw,
> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a_ao.hw,
> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK2]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a.hw,
> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK2_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a_ao.hw,
> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK3]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2.hw,
> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2_ao.hw,
> +	[RPMH_IPA_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_ipa.hw,
> +};
> +
> +static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_sm8750 = {
> +	.clks = sm8750_rpmh_clocks,
> +	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8750_rpmh_clocks),
> +};
> +
>  static struct clk_hw *of_clk_rpmh_hw_get(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec,
>  					 void *data)
>  {
> @@ -894,6 +919,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sa8775p},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sar2130p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sar2130p},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7180},
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8180x},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8280xp},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sdm845},
> @@ -909,7 +935,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8450-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8450},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8550},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8650-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8650},
> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},

Please don't mix fixes and actual code. I'd suggest splitting sc7280
move to the separate commit.

> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8750-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8750},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_x1e80100},
>  	{ }
>  };
> -- 
> 2.46.1
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry
Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8750 rpmh clocks
Posted by Taniya Das 1 year, 2 months ago 

On 11/15/2024 9:01 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> From: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
>>
>> Add the RPMH clocks present in SM8750 SoC and fix the match table to
>> sort it alphabetically.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>> index eefc322ce367..a3b381e34e48 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>> @@ -368,6 +368,10 @@ DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk2, _d, "rfclkd2", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _d, "rfclkd3", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _d, "rfclkd4", 1);
>>   
>> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _a2, "rfclka3", 2);
>> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _a2, "rfclka4", 2);
>> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk5, _a2, "rfclka5", 2);
> 
> Are the two last clocks defined "for the future platforms"?
> 

Yes, but I will remove them in the next patch set.

>> +
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk1, _a1, "clka1", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk2, _a1, "clka2", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk3, _a1, "clka3", 1);
>> @@ -807,6 +811,27 @@ static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_x1e80100 = {
>>   	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(x1e80100_rpmh_clocks),
>>   };
>>   
>> +static struct clk_hw *sm8750_rpmh_clocks[] = {
>> +	[RPMH_CXO_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_CXO_CLK_A]	= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK1]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK2]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK2_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK3]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_IPA_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_ipa.hw,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_sm8750 = {
>> +	.clks = sm8750_rpmh_clocks,
>> +	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8750_rpmh_clocks),
>> +};
>> +
>>   static struct clk_hw *of_clk_rpmh_hw_get(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec,
>>   					 void *data)
>>   {
>> @@ -894,6 +919,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sa8775p},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sar2130p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sar2130p},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7180},
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8180x},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8280xp},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sdm845},
>> @@ -909,7 +935,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8450-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8450},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8550},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8650-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8650},
>> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
> 
> Please don't mix fixes and actual code. I'd suggest splitting sc7280
> move to the separate commit.
> 

Sure, I will split in a separate commit.

>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8750-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8750},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_x1e80100},
>>   	{ }
>>   };
>> -- 
>> 2.46.1
>>
> 

-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Taniya Das.
Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8750 rpmh clocks
Posted by Melody Olvera 1 year, 2 months ago 

On 11/15/2024 7:31 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> From: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
>>
>> Add the RPMH clocks present in SM8750 SoC and fix the match table to
>> sort it alphabetically.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Melody Olvera <quic_molvera@quicinc.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>> index eefc322ce367..a3b381e34e48 100644
>> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-rpmh.c
>> @@ -368,6 +368,10 @@ DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk2, _d, "rfclkd2", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _d, "rfclkd3", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _d, "rfclkd4", 1);
>>   
>> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk3, _a2, "rfclka3", 2);
>> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk4, _a2, "rfclka4", 2);
>> +DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(rf_clk5, _a2, "rfclka5", 2);
> Are the two last clocks defined "for the future platforms"?

I'm unsure; I'll let Taniya comment.

>
>> +
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk1, _a1, "clka1", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk2, _a1, "clka2", 1);
>>   DEFINE_CLK_RPMH_VRM(clk3, _a1, "clka3", 1);
>> @@ -807,6 +811,27 @@ static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_x1e80100 = {
>>   	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(x1e80100_rpmh_clocks),
>>   };
>>   
>> +static struct clk_hw *sm8750_rpmh_clocks[] = {
>> +	[RPMH_CXO_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_CXO_CLK_A]	= &clk_rpmh_bi_tcxo_div2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk6_a2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_LN_BB_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_clk8_a2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK1]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK1_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk1_a_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK2]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK2_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk2_a_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK3]		= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_RF_CLK3_A]	= &clk_rpmh_rf_clk3_a2_ao.hw,
>> +	[RPMH_IPA_CLK]		= &clk_rpmh_ipa.hw,
>> +};
>> +
>> +static const struct clk_rpmh_desc clk_rpmh_sm8750 = {
>> +	.clks = sm8750_rpmh_clocks,
>> +	.num_clks = ARRAY_SIZE(sm8750_rpmh_clocks),
>> +};
>> +
>>   static struct clk_hw *of_clk_rpmh_hw_get(struct of_phandle_args *clkspec,
>>   					 void *data)
>>   {
>> @@ -894,6 +919,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sa8775p},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sar2130p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sar2130p},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7180},
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8180x},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8280xp},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sdm845},
>> @@ -909,7 +935,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8450-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8450},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8550},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8650-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8650},
>> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
> Please don't mix fixes and actual code. I'd suggest splitting sc7280
> move to the separate commit.

Bryan O'Donoghue requested we sort these as part of this patch. I don't 
feel strongly either way,
but clear guidance here would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Melody

>
>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8750-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8750},
>>   	{ .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_x1e80100},
>>   	{ }
>>   };
>> -- 
>> 2.46.1
>>
Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8750 rpmh clocks
Posted by Dmitry Baryshkov 1 year, 2 months ago 
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 10:53:16AM -0800, Melody Olvera wrote:
> On 11/15/2024 7:31 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Melody Olvera wrote:
> > > From: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>

[...]

> > > @@ -894,6 +919,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sa8775p},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sar2130p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sar2130p},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7180},
> > > +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8180x},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8280xp},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sdm845},
> > > @@ -909,7 +935,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8450-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8450},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8550},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8650-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8650},
> > > -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
> > Please don't mix fixes and actual code. I'd suggest splitting sc7280
> > move to the separate commit.
> 
> Bryan O'Donoghue requested we sort these as part of this patch. I don't feel
> strongly either way,
> but clear guidance here would be appreciated.

I don't see v1 of this patch on the linux-arm-msm list (hint: use b4
tool to send patches), so I can not comment on what Bryan ment. But I'd
definitely say, moving of the sc7280 entry is a _separate_ commit.

> 
> Thanks,
> Melody
> 
> > 
> > > +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8750-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8750},
> > >   	{ .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_x1e80100},
> > >   	{ }
> > >   };
> > > -- 
> > > 2.46.1
> > > 
> 

-- 
With best wishes
Dmitry
Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] clk: qcom: rpmh: Add support for SM8750 rpmh clocks
Posted by Taniya Das 1 year, 2 months ago 

On 11/19/2024 7:28 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 10:53:16AM -0800, Melody Olvera wrote:
>> On 11/15/2024 7:31 AM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 11, 2024 at 04:28:02PM -0800, Melody Olvera wrote:
>>>> From: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@quicinc.com>
> 
> [...]
> 
>>>> @@ -894,6 +919,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sa8775p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sa8775p},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sar2130p-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sar2130p},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7180},
>>>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8180x-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8180x},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc8280xp-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc8280xp},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sdm845-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sdm845},
>>>> @@ -909,7 +935,7 @@ static const struct of_device_id clk_rpmh_match_table[] = {
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8450-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8450},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8550-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8550},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8650-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8650},
>>>> -	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7280-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sc7280},
>>> Please don't mix fixes and actual code. I'd suggest splitting sc7280
>>> move to the separate commit.
>>
>> Bryan O'Donoghue requested we sort these as part of this patch. I don't feel
>> strongly either way,
>> but clear guidance here would be appreciated.
> 
> I don't see v1 of this patch on the linux-arm-msm list (hint: use b4
> tool to send patches), so I can not comment on what Bryan ment. But I'd
> definitely say, moving of the sc7280 entry is a _separate_ commit.
> 
>>

I will push the latest patch fixing the issues in this patch.

>> Thanks,
>> Melody
>>
>>>
>>>> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,sm8750-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_sm8750},
>>>>    	{ .compatible = "qcom,x1e80100-rpmh-clk", .data = &clk_rpmh_x1e80100},
>>>>    	{ }
>>>>    };
>>>> -- 
>>>> 2.46.1
>>>>
>>
> 

-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Taniya Das.

Patchew 2.1-devel-b67e4c2

© 2016 - 2026 Red Hat, Inc.