Re: [PATCH v6 5/6] clk: qcom: lpassaudiocc-sc7280: Merge lpasscc into lpass_aon

[Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu]

On 2/1/2023 1:56 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Thanks for your time Stephen!!!
> Quoting Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu (2023-01-31 01:29:16)
> > On 1/31/2023 6:34 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > Thanks for your Time Stephen!!!
> > > Quoting Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu (2023-01-26 02:14:24)
> > > > Merge lpasscc clocks into lpass_aon clk_regmap structure as they
> > > > are using same register space.
> > > > Add conditional check for doing lpasscc clock registration only
> > > > if regname specified in device tree node.
> > > > In existing implementation, lpasscc clocks and lpass_aon clocks are
> > > > being registered exclusively and overlapping if both of them are
> > > > to be used.
> > > > This is required to avoid such overlapping and to register
> > > > lpasscc clocks and lpass_aon clocks simultaneously.
> > > Can you describe the register ranges that are overlapping?
> > Okay. Will add register ranges in description.
> Thanks!
>
> > > Here's what I see in DT right now:
> > >
> > >                   lpasscc: lpasscc@3000000 {
> > >                           compatible = "qcom,sc7280-lpasscc";
> > >                           reg = <0 0x03000000 0 0x40>,
> > >                                 <0 0x03c04000 0 0x4>;
> > >                           ...
> > >                   };
> > >
> > >                   lpass_audiocc: clock-controller@3300000 {
> > >                           compatible = "qcom,sc7280-lpassaudiocc";
> > >                           reg = <0 0x03300000 0 0x30000>,
> > >                                 <0 0x032a9000 0 0x1000>;
> > >                           ...
> > >                   };
> > >
> > >                   lpass_aon: clock-controller@3380000 {
> > >                           compatible = "qcom,sc7280-lpassaoncc";
> > >                           reg = <0 0x03380000 0 0x30000>;
> > >                           ...
> > >                   };
> > >
> > >                   lpass_core: clock-controller@3900000 {
> > >                           compatible = "qcom,sc7280-lpasscorecc";
> > >                           reg = <0 0x03900000 0 0x50000>;
> > >                           ...
> > >                   };
> > >
> > > Presumably lpascc is really supposed to be a node named
> > > 'clock-controller' and is the node that is overlapping with lpass_aon?
> > Okay. As it's been coming previous patches, didn't change the name.
> >
> > May be we need to do it as separate patch.
> Sure, another patch to rename lpasscc to clock-controller would be
> appreciated.
>
> > Yes. It's overlapping with lpass_aon ( <0 0x03380000 0 0x30000>).
> >
> > CC clocks range is <0 0x03389000 0 0x24>;
> Is that a new register range for lpasscc? Why do we have that node at
> all? Can we add different properties to the existing lpass_audiocc,
> lpass_aon, or lpass_core nodes to indicate what clks should or shouldn't
> be registered or provided to the kernel?

It's not new register range. They are actually AHBM and AHBS clock 
registers within lpass_aon regmap range.

Here what I meant lpasscc clocks are not of lpasscc node. I am sorry to 
make you confused.

As the reg-name used as "CC", mentioning it as lpasscc clocks. I will 
rephrase commit message and re-post.

Previously these two clocks are registered separately. Now we are 
merging them into lpass_aon clk reg space.


> > > > Fixes: 4ab43d171181 ("clk: qcom: Add lpass clock controller driver for SC7280")
> > > > Signed-off-by: Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <quic_srivasam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Tested-by: Mohammad Rafi Shaik <quic_mohs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > >    drivers/clk/qcom/lpassaudiocc-sc7280.c | 13 +++++++++----
> > > >    1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/lpassaudiocc-sc7280.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/lpassaudiocc-sc7280.c
> > > > index 1339f92..8e2f433 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/lpassaudiocc-sc7280.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/lpassaudiocc-sc7280.c
> > > > @@ -826,10 +829,12 @@ static int lpass_aon_cc_sc7280_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > > >                   return ret;
> > > >
> > > >           if (of_property_read_bool(pdev->dev.of_node, "qcom,adsp-pil-mode")) {
> > > > -               lpass_audio_cc_sc7280_regmap_config.name = "cc";
> > > > -               desc = &lpass_cc_sc7280_desc;
> > > > -               ret = qcom_cc_probe(pdev, desc);
> > > > -               goto exit;
> > > > +               res = platform_get_resource_byname(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, "cc");
> > > We shouldn't need to check for reg-name property. Instead, the index
> > > should be the only thing that matters.
> > As qcom_cc_probe() function is mapping the zero index reg property, and
> >
> > in next implementation qcom_cc_really_probe() is also probing zero index
> > reg property,
> >
> > unable to map the same region twice.
> Use qcom_cc_probe_by_index()?

With this, if we mention some index and if it's not present in DT, it 
will return error.

Is it okay if error is ignored and proceed?

> > Hence all I want here is to skip this cc clock probing by keeping some
> > check.
> >
> > If we remove, it may cause ABI break.
> I'm not sure what you mean here about ABI break, but hopefully just
> using qcom_cc_probe_by_index() works!