Hi Stephen,
Many thanks for reviewing.

On 10/19/2016 10:24 PM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 10/14, [email protected] wrote:
@@ -292,8 +298,110 @@ static int stm32f4_rcc_lookup_clk_idx(u8 primary, u8 
secondary)
        return clks[i];
  }
+static struct regmap *pdrm;
This can't be part of the stm32_rgate structure?
yes i can include it.


+
+static inline void disable_power_domain_write_protection(void)
+{
+       regmap_update_bits(pdrm, 0x00, (1 << 8), (1 << 8));
+}
+
+static inline void enable_power_domain_write_protection(void)
+{
+       regmap_update_bits(pdrm, 0x00, (1 << 8), (0 << 8));
+}
+
+struct stm32_rgate {
+       struct  clk_hw hw;
+       struct  clk_gate gate;
Why not use the clk_hw inside clk_gate?yes you right, if it's optional i won't 
have dependency with DT
ok

+       u8      bit_rdy_idx;
+};
+
+#define RTC_TIMEOUT 1000000
+
+#define to_rgclk(_hw) container_of(_hw, struct stm32_rgate, hw)
+
+static int rgclk_enable(struct clk_hw *hw)
+{
+       struct stm32_rgate *rgate = to_rgclk(hw);
+       struct clk_hw *gate_hw = &rgate->gate.hw;
+       struct clk_gate *gate = to_clk_gate(gate_hw);
+       u32 reg;
+       int ret;
+
+       __clk_hw_set_clk(gate_hw, hw);
Then we don't need this part.

+
+       disable_power_domain_write_protection();
+
+       clk_gate_ops.enable(gate_hw);
+
+       ret = readl_relaxed_poll_timeout_atomic(gate->reg, reg,
+                       reg & rgate->bit_rdy_idx, 1000, RTC_TIMEOUT);
+
+       enable_power_domain_write_protection();
+
+       return ret;
+}
+
+static void rgclk_disable(struct clk_hw *hw)
+{
+       clk_gate_ops.disable(hw);
+}
+
+static int rgclk_is_enabled(struct clk_hw *hw)
+{
+       return clk_gate_ops.is_enabled(hw);
+}
+
+
Drop the double newline here please.
ok

+static const struct clk_ops rgclk_ops = {
+       .enable = rgclk_enable,
+       .disable = rgclk_disable,
+       .is_enabled = rgclk_is_enabled,
+};
+
+static struct clk_hw *clk_register_rgate(struct device *dev, const char *name,
+               const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags,
+               void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, u8 bit_rdy_idx,
+               u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock)
+{
+       struct stm32_rgate *rgate;
+       struct clk_init_data init = { NULL };
+       struct clk_hw *hw;
+       int ret;
+
+       rgate = kzalloc(sizeof(*rgate), GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!rgate)
+               return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+       init.name = name;
+       init.ops = &rgclk_ops;
+       init.flags = flags | CLK_IS_BASIC;
Please no CLK_IS_BASIC flags.
ok

+       init.parent_names = &parent_name;
+       init.num_parents = 1;
+
+       rgate->hw.init = &init;
+       rgate->bit_rdy_idx = bit_rdy_idx;
+
+       rgate->gate.lock = lock;
+       rgate->gate.reg = reg;
+       rgate->gate.bit_idx = bit_idx;
+
+       hw = &rgate->hw;
+       ret = clk_hw_register(dev, hw);
+       if (ret) {
+               kfree(rgate);
+               hw = ERR_PTR(ret);
+       }
+
+       return hw;
+}
+
  static const char *sys_parents[] __initdata =   { "hsi", NULL, "pll" };
+const char *rtc_parents[4] = {
static const char * const?
ok

+       "no-clock", "lse", "lsi", "hse-rtc"
+};
+
  static const struct clk_div_table ahb_div_table[] = {
        { 0x0,   1 }, { 0x1,   1 }, { 0x2,   1 }, { 0x3,   1 },
        { 0x4,   1 }, { 0x5,   1 }, { 0x6,   1 }, { 0x7,   1 },
@@ -319,6 +427,12 @@ static void __init stm32f4_rcc_init(struct device_node *np)
                return;
        }
+ pdrm = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(np, "st,syscfg");
Is there a dt binding update for this? It should probably be
optional?
yes you right, if it's optional i don't need dependency with DT

+       if (IS_ERR(pdrm)) {
+               pr_err("%s: Unable to get syscfg\n", __func__);
+               goto fail;
+       }
+
        hse_clk = of_clk_get_parent_name(np, 0);

Reply via email to