Hi Heiko, Thank you very much for your quick review!
On 6/1/20 10:09 PM, Heiko Stübner wrote:
Hi Mylène, Am Montag, 1. Juni 2020, 17:14:42 CEST schrieb Mylène Josserand:The revision rk3288w has a different clock tree about "hclk_vio" clock, according to the BSP kernel code. This patch handles this difference by detecting which device-tree we are using. If it is a "rockchip,rk3288-cru", let's register the clock tree as it was before. If the compatible is "rockchip,rk3288w-cru", we will apply the difference according to this version of this SoC. Noticed that this new device-tree compatible must be handled by bootloader. Signed-off-by: Mylène Josserand <mylene.josser...@collabora.com>approach looks good, but you should also update the clock-controller dt-binding for the new compatible.
Okay, I will. As it was not implemented in the Kernel, I didn't know if I should add it.
Style nits below.--- drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c index cc2a177bbdbf..5018d2f1e54c 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-rk3288.c @@ -425,8 +425,6 @@ static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288_clk_branches[] __initdata = { COMPOSITE(0, "aclk_vio0", mux_pll_src_cpll_gpll_usb480m_p, CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(31), 6, 2, MFLAGS, 0, 5, DFLAGS, RK3288_CLKGATE_CON(3), 0, GFLAGS), - DIV(0, "hclk_vio", "aclk_vio0", 0, - RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(28), 8, 5, DFLAGS), COMPOSITE(0, "aclk_vio1", mux_pll_src_cpll_gpll_usb480m_p, CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(31), 14, 2, MFLAGS, 8, 5, DFLAGS, RK3288_CLKGATE_CON(3), 2, GFLAGS), @@ -819,6 +817,16 @@ static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288_clk_branches[] __initdata = { INVERTER(0, "pclk_isp", "pclk_isp_in", RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(29), 3, IFLAGS), };+static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288w_hclkvio_branch[] __initdata = {+ DIV(0, "hclk_vio", "aclk_vio1", 0, + RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(28), 8, 5, DFLAGS),please keep indentations as they were, the sub-lines starting where they are is actually intentional :-)
Oups, I didn't know, I will update this in my V4.
+}; + +static struct rockchip_clk_branch rk3288_hclkvio_branch[] __initdata = { + DIV(0, "hclk_vio", "aclk_vio0", 0, + RK3288_CLKSEL_CON(28), 8, 5, DFLAGS),same here
same here
+}; + static const char *const rk3288_critical_clocks[] __initconst = { "aclk_cpu", "aclk_peri", @@ -936,6 +944,14 @@ static void __init rk3288_clk_init(struct device_node *np) RK3288_GRF_SOC_STATUS1); rockchip_clk_register_branches(ctx, rk3288_clk_branches, ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288_clk_branches)); + + if (of_device_is_compatible(np, "rockchip,rk3288w-cru")) + rockchip_clk_register_branches(ctx, rk3288w_hclkvio_branch, + ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288w_hclkvio_branch)); + else + rockchip_clk_register_branches(ctx, rk3288_hclkvio_branch, + ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288_hclkvio_branch)); + rockchip_clk_protect_critical(rk3288_critical_clocks, ARRAY_SIZE(rk3288_critical_clocks));
Best regards, Mylène
