diff mbox series

[v2,3/9] dt-bindings: clock: ipq5332: drop the few nss clocks definition

Message ID 20231121-ipq5332-nsscc-v2-3-a7ff61beab72@quicinc.com (mailing list archive)
State Not Applicable
Headers show
Series Add NSS clock controller support for Qualcomm IPQ5332 | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/tree_selection success Not a local patch

Commit Message

Kathiravan Thirumoorthy Nov. 21, 2023, 2:30 p.m. UTC
In commit 0dd3f263c810 ("clk: qcom: ipq5332: enable few nssnoc clocks in
driver probe"), gcc_snoc_nssnoc_clk, gcc_snoc_nssnoc_1_clk,
gcc_nssnoc_nsscc_clk are enabled in driver probe to keep it always-on.

So let's drop the binding definition as well.

Signed-off-by: Kathiravan Thirumoorthy <quic_kathirav@quicinc.com>
---
Changes in V2:
	- No changes
---
 include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.h | 3 ---
 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Krzysztof Kozlowski Nov. 21, 2023, 3:06 p.m. UTC | #1
On 21/11/2023 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> In commit 0dd3f263c810 ("clk: qcom: ipq5332: enable few nssnoc clocks in

Where is this commit coming from?

> driver probe"), gcc_snoc_nssnoc_clk, gcc_snoc_nssnoc_1_clk,
> gcc_nssnoc_nsscc_clk are enabled in driver probe to keep it always-on.

Implementation can change and for example bring back these clocks. Are
you going to change bindings? No, drop the patch.

Bindings should be dropped only in a few rare cases like clocks not
available for OS or bugs.

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Kathiravan Thirumoorthy Nov. 22, 2023, 10:08 a.m. UTC | #2
On 11/21/2023 8:36 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 21/11/2023 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>> In commit 0dd3f263c810 ("clk: qcom: ipq5332: enable few nssnoc clocks in
> 
> Where is this commit coming from?
> 
>> driver probe"), gcc_snoc_nssnoc_clk, gcc_snoc_nssnoc_1_clk,
>> gcc_nssnoc_nsscc_clk are enabled in driver probe to keep it always-on.
> 
> Implementation can change and for example bring back these clocks. Are
> you going to change bindings? No, drop the patch.
> 
> Bindings should be dropped only in a few rare cases like clocks not
> available for OS or bugs.

Thanks Krzysztof. Will drop this patch in V3.

One more question to understand further. In IPQ SoCs there are bunch of 
coresight / QDSS clocks but coresight framework doesn't handle all 
clocks. Those clocks are enabled in bootloader stage itself. In such 
case, should I drop the clocks from both binding and driver or only from 
driver?

Thanks,
Kathiravan.

> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Krzysztof Kozlowski Nov. 22, 2023, 10:12 a.m. UTC | #3
On 22/11/2023 11:08, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/21/2023 8:36 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>> On 21/11/2023 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>>> In commit 0dd3f263c810 ("clk: qcom: ipq5332: enable few nssnoc clocks in
>>
>> Where is this commit coming from?
>>
>>> driver probe"), gcc_snoc_nssnoc_clk, gcc_snoc_nssnoc_1_clk,
>>> gcc_nssnoc_nsscc_clk are enabled in driver probe to keep it always-on.
>>
>> Implementation can change and for example bring back these clocks. Are
>> you going to change bindings? No, drop the patch.
>>
>> Bindings should be dropped only in a few rare cases like clocks not
>> available for OS or bugs.
> 
> Thanks Krzysztof. Will drop this patch in V3.
> 
> One more question to understand further. In IPQ SoCs there are bunch of 
> coresight / QDSS clocks but coresight framework doesn't handle all 
> clocks. Those clocks are enabled in bootloader stage itself. In such 
> case, should I drop the clocks from both binding and driver or only from 
> driver?

That's not really the reason to drop them at all. Neither from driver,
nor from bindings. You should not rely on bootloader handling your clocks

Best regards,
Krzysztof
Kathiravan Thirumoorthy Nov. 22, 2023, 10:18 a.m. UTC | #4
On 11/22/2023 3:42 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 22/11/2023 11:08, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/21/2023 8:36 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 21/11/2023 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>>>> In commit 0dd3f263c810 ("clk: qcom: ipq5332: enable few nssnoc clocks in
>>>
>>> Where is this commit coming from?
>>>
>>>> driver probe"), gcc_snoc_nssnoc_clk, gcc_snoc_nssnoc_1_clk,
>>>> gcc_nssnoc_nsscc_clk are enabled in driver probe to keep it always-on.
>>>
>>> Implementation can change and for example bring back these clocks. Are
>>> you going to change bindings? No, drop the patch.
>>>
>>> Bindings should be dropped only in a few rare cases like clocks not
>>> available for OS or bugs.
>>
>> Thanks Krzysztof. Will drop this patch in V3.
>>
>> One more question to understand further. In IPQ SoCs there are bunch of
>> coresight / QDSS clocks but coresight framework doesn't handle all
>> clocks. Those clocks are enabled in bootloader stage itself. In such
>> case, should I drop the clocks from both binding and driver or only from
>> driver?
> 
> That's not really the reason to drop them at all. Neither from driver,
> nor from bindings. You should not rely on bootloader handling your clocks


Thanks, lets say if those clocks are not needed at all by OS since QDSS 
is not used and needed only for the boot loaders to access the 
corresponding address space, in such case what can be done? I 
understand, at first those clocks should not have been added to the driver.


> 
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof
>
Dmitry Baryshkov Nov. 22, 2023, 10:23 a.m. UTC | #5
On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 12:19, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy
<quic_kathirav@quicinc.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 11/22/2023 3:42 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 22/11/2023 11:08, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On 11/21/2023 8:36 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> >>> On 21/11/2023 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
> >>>> In commit 0dd3f263c810 ("clk: qcom: ipq5332: enable few nssnoc clocks in
> >>>
> >>> Where is this commit coming from?
> >>>
> >>>> driver probe"), gcc_snoc_nssnoc_clk, gcc_snoc_nssnoc_1_clk,
> >>>> gcc_nssnoc_nsscc_clk are enabled in driver probe to keep it always-on.
> >>>
> >>> Implementation can change and for example bring back these clocks. Are
> >>> you going to change bindings? No, drop the patch.
> >>>
> >>> Bindings should be dropped only in a few rare cases like clocks not
> >>> available for OS or bugs.
> >>
> >> Thanks Krzysztof. Will drop this patch in V3.
> >>
> >> One more question to understand further. In IPQ SoCs there are bunch of
> >> coresight / QDSS clocks but coresight framework doesn't handle all
> >> clocks. Those clocks are enabled in bootloader stage itself. In such
> >> case, should I drop the clocks from both binding and driver or only from
> >> driver?
> >
> > That's not really the reason to drop them at all. Neither from driver,
> > nor from bindings. You should not rely on bootloader handling your clocks
>
>
> Thanks, lets say if those clocks are not needed at all by OS since QDSS
> is not used and needed only for the boot loaders to access the
> corresponding address space, in such case what can be done? I
> understand, at first those clocks should not have been added to the driver.

First, what is QDSS? Yet another acronym?

Second, if they are not used now, they can get used later.
Kathiravan Thirumoorthy Nov. 22, 2023, 10:45 a.m. UTC | #6
On 11/22/2023 3:53 PM, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Nov 2023 at 12:19, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy
> <quic_kathirav@quicinc.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11/22/2023 3:42 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>> On 22/11/2023 11:08, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/21/2023 8:36 PM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
>>>>> On 21/11/2023 15:30, Kathiravan Thirumoorthy wrote:
>>>>>> In commit 0dd3f263c810 ("clk: qcom: ipq5332: enable few nssnoc clocks in
>>>>>
>>>>> Where is this commit coming from?
>>>>>
>>>>>> driver probe"), gcc_snoc_nssnoc_clk, gcc_snoc_nssnoc_1_clk,
>>>>>> gcc_nssnoc_nsscc_clk are enabled in driver probe to keep it always-on.
>>>>>
>>>>> Implementation can change and for example bring back these clocks. Are
>>>>> you going to change bindings? No, drop the patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Bindings should be dropped only in a few rare cases like clocks not
>>>>> available for OS or bugs.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Krzysztof. Will drop this patch in V3.
>>>>
>>>> One more question to understand further. In IPQ SoCs there are bunch of
>>>> coresight / QDSS clocks but coresight framework doesn't handle all
>>>> clocks. Those clocks are enabled in bootloader stage itself. In such
>>>> case, should I drop the clocks from both binding and driver or only from
>>>> driver?
>>>
>>> That's not really the reason to drop them at all. Neither from driver,
>>> nor from bindings. You should not rely on bootloader handling your clocks
>>
>>
>> Thanks, lets say if those clocks are not needed at all by OS since QDSS
>> is not used and needed only for the boot loaders to access the
>> corresponding address space, in such case what can be done? I
>> understand, at first those clocks should not have been added to the driver.
> 
> First, what is QDSS? Yet another acronym?

Qualcomm Debug Sub System - which compromises of various debug infra 
like coresight, DCC and so on.

> 
> Second, if they are not used now, they can get used later.
> 

Thanks. I will drop it from driver and leave the bindings as it is.

Thanks,
Kathiravan
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.h b/include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.h
index 8a405a0a96d0..4649026da332 100644
--- a/include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.h
+++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/qcom,ipq5332-gcc.h
@@ -55,7 +55,6 @@ 
 #define GCC_NSSCC_CLK					46
 #define GCC_NSSCFG_CLK					47
 #define GCC_NSSNOC_ATB_CLK				48
-#define GCC_NSSNOC_NSSCC_CLK				49
 #define GCC_NSSNOC_QOSGEN_REF_CLK			50
 #define GCC_NSSNOC_SNOC_1_CLK				51
 #define GCC_NSSNOC_SNOC_CLK				52
@@ -124,8 +123,6 @@ 
 #define GCC_SDCC1_APPS_CLK_SRC				115
 #define GCC_SLEEP_CLK_SRC				116
 #define GCC_SNOC_LPASS_CFG_CLK				117
-#define GCC_SNOC_NSSNOC_1_CLK				118
-#define GCC_SNOC_NSSNOC_CLK				119
 #define GCC_SNOC_PCIE3_1LANE_1_M_CLK			120
 #define GCC_SNOC_PCIE3_1LANE_1_S_CLK			121
 #define GCC_SNOC_PCIE3_1LANE_M_CLK			122