Re: [PATCH 1/4] clk: qcom: branch: Extend the invert logic for branch2 clocks

[Taniya Das]

Hello Stephen,

Thanks for your review.

On 4/20/2023 3:07 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> Quoting Taniya Das (2023-04-19 06:30:10)
> > From: Imran Shaik <quic_imrashai@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Add support to handle the invert logic for branch2 clocks.
> > Invert branch halt would indicate the clock ON when CLK_OFF
> > bit is '1' and OFF when CLK_OFF bit is '0'.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Imran Shaik <quic_imrashai@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Taniya Das <quic_tdas@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c | 8 ++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c
> > index f869fc6aaed6..4b24d45be771 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/clk-branch.c
> > @@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ static bool clk_branch2_check_halt(const struct clk_branch *br, bool enabling)
> >   {
> >          u32 val;
> >          u32 mask;
> > +       bool invert = (br->halt_check == BRANCH_HALT_ENABLE);
> >   
> >          mask = BRANCH_NOC_FSM_STATUS_MASK << BRANCH_NOC_FSM_STATUS_SHIFT;
> >          mask |= BRANCH_CLK_OFF;
> > @@ -56,9 +57,16 @@ static bool clk_branch2_check_halt(const struct clk_branch *br, bool enabling)
> >   
> >          if (enabling) {
> >                  val &= mask;
> > +
> > +               if (invert)
> > +                       return (val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF) == BRANCH_CLK_OFF;
> > +
> >                  return (val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF) == 0 ||
> >                          val == BRANCH_NOC_FSM_STATUS_ON;
>
> Do these clks have a NOC_FSM_STATUS bit? I think it would be better to
> make a local variable for the val we're looking for, and then test for
> that. We may need a mask as well, but the idea is to not duplicate the
> test and return from multiple places.

Clocks which has invert status doesn't have NOC_FSM_STATUS bit.
Will remove the multiple returns in next patch.

> >          } else {
> > +               if (invert)
> > +                       return (val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF) == 0;
> > +
> >                  return val & BRANCH_CLK_OFF;
> >          }
>
> While at it, I'd get rid of this else and de-indent the code because if
> we're 'enabling' we'll return from the function regardless.


Yes, Stephen, will take care in the next patch.

--
Thanks & Regards,
Taniya Das.