On 21/07/15 19:05, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/20/2015 01:54 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 17/07/15 19:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
determine_rate change shouldn't affect SCPI clock driver but I remember
seeing round_rate change too on the list
On 21/07/15 19:05, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/20/2015 01:54 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 17/07/15 19:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
determine_rate change shouldn't affect SCPI clock driver but I remember
seeing round_rate change too on the list
On 07/20/2015 01:54 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 17/07/15 19:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
determine_rate change shouldn't affect SCPI clock driver but I remember
seeing round_rate change too on the list which returns value using the
argument
On 07/20/2015 01:54 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 17/07/15 19:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
determine_rate change shouldn't affect SCPI clock driver but I remember
seeing round_rate change too on the list which returns value using the
argument
On 17/07/15 19:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
determine_rate change shouldn't affect SCPI clock driver but I remember
seeing round_rate change too on the list which returns value using the
argument from Boris. Is that planned for v4.3 ? I would
On 17/07/15 19:13, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
determine_rate change shouldn't affect SCPI clock driver but I remember
seeing round_rate change too on the list which returns value using the
argument from Boris. Is that planned for v4.3 ? I would
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 16/07/15 20:31, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/16, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Yes struct clk would have min/max, and struct clk_core would have
min/max. Then some sort of provider API (or possibly even
clk_init_data)
On 16/07/15 20:31, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/16, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Yes struct clk would have min/max, and struct clk_core would have
min/max. Then some sort of provider API (or possibly even
clk_init_data) would take the min/max fields and copy them
On 16/07/15 20:31, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/16, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Yes struct clk would have min/max, and struct clk_core would have
min/max. Then some sort of provider API (or possibly even
clk_init_data) would take the min/max fields and copy them
On 07/17/2015 04:17 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 16/07/15 20:31, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/16, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Yes struct clk would have min/max, and struct clk_core would have
min/max. Then some sort of provider API (or possibly even
clk_init_data)
On 07/16, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >
> >Yes struct clk would have min/max, and struct clk_core would have
> >min/max. Then some sort of provider API (or possibly even
> >clk_init_data) would take the min/max fields and copy them over
> >to struct clk_core.
Hi Stephen,
On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/07, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 06/07/15 20:52, Stephen Boyd wrote:
If I have time I may try to start doing the clk_register() conversion,
but it will take a while so I doubt it will be in v4.3. I'm asking if
you can add a clk_hw based
Hi Stephen,
On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/07, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 06/07/15 20:52, Stephen Boyd wrote:
If I have time I may try to start doing the clk_register() conversion,
but it will take a while so I doubt it will be in v4.3. I'm asking if
you can add a clk_hw based
On 07/16, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 08/07/15 02:46, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Yes struct clk would have min/max, and struct clk_core would have
min/max. Then some sort of provider API (or possibly even
clk_init_data) would take the min/max fields and copy them over
to struct clk_core. Then during
On 07/07, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>
>
> On 06/07/15 20:52, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>
> >
> >If I have time I may try to start doing the clk_register() conversion,
> >but it will take a while so I doubt it will be in v4.3. I'm asking if
> >you can add a clk_hw based API that does something like
>
On 06/07/15 20:52, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/03/2015 07:52 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/07/15 18:23, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
+
+clk = devm_clk_register(dev, >hw);
+if (!IS_ERR(clk) && max)
+
On 06/07/15 20:52, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 07/03/2015 07:52 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/07/15 18:23, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
+
+clk = devm_clk_register(dev, sclk-hw);
+if (!IS_ERR(clk) max)
+
On 07/07, Sudeep Holla wrote:
On 06/07/15 20:52, Stephen Boyd wrote:
If I have time I may try to start doing the clk_register() conversion,
but it will take a while so I doubt it will be in v4.3. I'm asking if
you can add a clk_hw based API that does something like
On 07/03/2015 07:52 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
>
> Thanks for the review.
>
> On 02/07/15 18:23, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
>>> index 9897f353bf1a..0fe8daefc105 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
On 07/03/2015 07:52 AM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/07/15 18:23, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
index 9897f353bf1a..0fe8daefc105 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
+++
On 03/07/15 15:52, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
+static int scpi_clk_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
+unsigned long parent_rate)
+{
+ struct scpi_clk *clk = to_scpi_clk(hw);
+
+ return clk->scpi_ops->clk_set_val(clk->id, rate);
+}
+
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/07/15 18:23, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
index 9897f353bf1a..0fe8daefc105 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
@@ -59,6 +59,16 @@ config
Hi Stephen,
Thanks for the review.
On 02/07/15 18:23, Stephen Boyd wrote:
On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
index 9897f353bf1a..0fe8daefc105 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
@@ -59,6 +59,16 @@ config
On 03/07/15 15:52, Sudeep Holla wrote:
[...]
+static int scpi_clk_set_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate,
+unsigned long parent_rate)
+{
+ struct scpi_clk *clk = to_scpi_clk(hw);
+
+ return clk-scpi_ops-clk_set_val(clk-id, rate);
+}
+
+static
On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> index 9897f353bf1a..0fe8daefc105 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> @@ -59,6 +59,16 @@ config COMMON_CLK_RK808
> clocked at 32KHz each. Clkout1 is always on, Clkout2 can
On 06/08, Sudeep Holla wrote:
diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
index 9897f353bf1a..0fe8daefc105 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
+++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
@@ -59,6 +59,16 @@ config COMMON_CLK_RK808
clocked at 32KHz each. Clkout1 is always on, Clkout2 can off
On some ARM based systems, a separate Cortex-M based System Control
Processor(SCP) provides the overall power, clock, reset and system
control. System Control and Power Interface(SCPI) Message Protocol
is defined for the communication between the Application Cores(AP)
and the SCP.
This patch adds
On some ARM based systems, a separate Cortex-M based System Control
Processor(SCP) provides the overall power, clock, reset and system
control. System Control and Power Interface(SCPI) Message Protocol
is defined for the communication between the Application Cores(AP)
and the SCP.
This patch adds
28 matches
Mail list logo
