Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1474893
| From | Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 |
| Date | 2016-09-02 07:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <scPd8-3He-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <scq53-2ou-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <scrNv-3uY-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <scu8F-5sK-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <scHIB-79t-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <scMIh-1VA-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Hi, On Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> wrote: > > > On 2016年09月02日 05:29, Doug Anderson wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:56 PM, Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi >>> >>> >>> On 2016年09月01日 12:20, Doug Anderson wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 7:29 PM, Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> This is fine to pick up _only_ if you don't care about suspend/resume. >>>>>> If you care about suspend/resume then someone needs to first write a >>>>>> patch that will re-init all "corecfg" values after power is turned on. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Do you mean corecfg_clockmultiplier and corecfg_baseclkfreq, if yes, we >>>>> don't need to strore/re-init it after resume. >>>>> corecfg_clockmultiplier is only used to fetch host->clk_mul, and >>>>> host->clk_mul has been a fixed value at run-time, unless driver unbind. >>>>> The same as corecfg_clockmultiplier, corecfg_baseclkfreq is used to >>>>> check >>>>> the xin_clk at probe time, we don't reference it at run-time. >>>>> BTW, I have tested suspend/resume on rk3399 prior to this sumbit, eMMC >>>>> works >>>>> fine. >>>> >>>> I guess I don't actually know how the corecfg_clockmultiplier and >>>> corecfg_baseclkfreq fields are actually used, but I presume that they >>>> actually do something useful and aren't used to just communicate back >>>> to software? >>> >>> >>> Take corecfg_clockmultiplier as example. >>> 1. sdhci driver fetch host->clk_mul from corecfg_clockmultiplier >>> 2. mmc->f_min and mmc->f_max are calculated via host->clk_mul, they're >>> used >>> for further initialization. >>> 3. if the corecfg_clockmultiplier is incorrect, sdhci will use improper >>> frequency to play. >>> >>> I think we don't need to store it due to it's a fixed value at run-time, >>> even if it is reset after a power cycle, the above will not be changed >>> via >>> software, except for dirver unbind . >>> >>>> I know that: >>>> >>>> 1. If I don't pick this patch and I suspend/resume, >>>> corecfg_clockmultiplier and corecfg_baseclkfreq are still fine after >>>> suspend / resume. >>>> >>>> 2. If I do pick this patch and I suspend/resume, >>>> corecfg_clockmultiplier and corecfg_baseclkfreq are wrong after >>>> suspend/resume (tested by reading /dev/mem directly from userspace >>>> after suspend/resume). >>>> >>>> >>>> Are you saying that it is unimportant that corecfg_clockmultiplier and >>>> corecfg_baseclkfreq are wrong? >>> >>> >>> Yup, corecfg_* stuff will be reset after a power cycle. >>> I mean that we need only to guarantee they're correct at probe time. >> >> So are you saying that the entire purpose of "corecfg_clockmultiplier" >> is that causes the "ClockMultiplier" field of the "EMMCCORE_CAP" >> register to get a certain value? >> ...and that the entire purpose of "corecfg_baseclkfreq" is that it >> causes the "BaseClockFreqSDClock" field of the "EMMCCORE_CAP" register >> to get a certain value? > > Yes, on rk3399: > corecfg_clockmultiplier <===> EMMCCORE_CAP1[23:16] ClockMultiplier > corecfg_baseclkfreq <===> EMMCCORE_CAP[15:8] BaseClockFreqSDClock > > If you re-write to either corecfg_* stuff, the corresponding CAP register > field will be changed too. > sdhci driver will fetch CAP register for initialization, we only need to > guarantee they're correct at probe time. > > Did that all make sense? Yes. Very odd, but it makes sense. It would still be nice to get these restored after runtime resume just for cleanliness, but it's not a blocker IMHO. Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH 0/2] Add power domain support for eMMC node on rk3399 Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> - 2016-08-27 15:50 +0200
[PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> - 2016-08-27 15:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com> - 2016-08-27 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> - 2016-08-29 04:20 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Elaine Zhang <zhangqing@rock-chips.com> - 2016-08-29 05:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com> - 2016-08-29 05:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-08-31 19:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> - 2016-09-01 04:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@rock-chips.com> - 2016-09-01 05:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> - 2016-09-01 16:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-09-02 00:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> - 2016-09-02 12:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> - 2016-09-02 16:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@linaro.org> - 2016-09-06 14:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-09-01 06:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> - 2016-09-01 09:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-09-01 23:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Ziyuan Xu <xzy.xu@rock-chips.com> - 2016-09-02 04:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: dts: rockchip: add eMMC's power domain support for rk3399 Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org> - 2016-09-02 07:30 +0200
csiph-web