@@ -323,6 +323,7 @@ int qcom_cc_really_probe(struct device *dev,
scd->dev = dev;
scd->scs = desc->gdscs;
scd->num = desc->num_gdscs;
+ scd->pd_list = cc->pd_list;
ret = gdsc_register(scd, &reset->rcdev, regmap);
if (ret)
return ret;
@@ -506,6 +506,36 @@ static int gdsc_init(struct gdsc *sc)
return ret;
}
+static int gdsc_add_subdomain_list(struct dev_pm_domain_list *pd_list,
+ struct generic_pm_domain *subdomain)
+{
+ int i, ret;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < pd_list->num_pds; i++) {
+ struct device *dev = pd_list->pd_devs[i];
+ struct generic_pm_domain *genpd = pd_to_genpd(dev->pm_domain);
+
+ ret = pm_genpd_add_subdomain(genpd, subdomain);
+ if (ret)
+ return ret;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void gdsc_remove_subdomain_list(struct dev_pm_domain_list *pd_list,
+ struct generic_pm_domain *subdomain)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < pd_list->num_pds; i++) {
+ struct device *dev = pd_list->pd_devs[i];
+ struct generic_pm_domain *genpd = pd_to_genpd(dev->pm_domain);
+
+ pm_genpd_remove_subdomain(genpd, subdomain);
+ }
+}
+
static void gdsc_pm_subdomain_remove(struct gdsc_desc *desc, size_t num)
{
struct device *dev = desc->dev;
@@ -520,6 +550,8 @@ static void gdsc_pm_subdomain_remove(struct gdsc_desc *desc, size_t num)
pm_genpd_remove_subdomain(scs[i]->parent, &scs[i]->pd);
else if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(dev->pm_domain))
pm_genpd_remove_subdomain(pd_to_genpd(dev->pm_domain), &scs[i]->pd);
+ else if (desc->pd_list)
+ gdsc_remove_subdomain_list(desc->pd_list, &scs[i]->pd);
}
}
@@ -575,6 +607,9 @@ int gdsc_register(struct gdsc_desc *desc,
ret = pm_genpd_add_subdomain(scs[i]->parent, &scs[i]->pd);
else if (!IS_ERR_OR_NULL(dev->pm_domain))
ret = pm_genpd_add_subdomain(pd_to_genpd(dev->pm_domain), &scs[i]->pd);
+ else if (desc->pd_list)
+ ret = gdsc_add_subdomain_list(desc->pd_list, &scs[i]->pd);
+
if (ret)
goto err_pm_subdomain_remove;
}
@@ -80,6 +80,7 @@ struct gdsc_desc {
struct device *dev;
struct gdsc **scs;
size_t num;
+ struct dev_pm_domain_list *pd_list;
};
#ifdef CONFIG_QCOM_GDSC
When a clock-controller has multiple power-domains we need to attach the GDSCs provided by the clock-controller to each of the list of power-domains as power subdomains of each of the power-domains respectively. GDSCs come in three forms: 1. A GDSC which has no parent GDSC in the controller and no child GDSCs. 2. A GDSC which has no parent GDSC in the controller and has child GDSCs. 3. A child GDSC which derives power from the parent GDSC @ #2. Cases 1 and 2 are "top-level" GDSCs which depend on the power-domains - the power-rails attached to the clock-controller to power-on. When dtsi::power-domains = <> points to a single power-domain, Linux' platform probe code takes care of hooking up the referenced power-domains to the clock-controller. When dtsi::power-domains = <> points to more than one power-domain we must take responsibility to attach the list of power-domains to our clock-controller. An added complexity is that currently gdsc_enable() and gdsc_disable() do not register the top-level GDSCs as power subdomains of the controller's power-domains. This patch makes the subdomain association between whatever list of top-level GDSCs a clock-controller provides and the power-domain list of that clock-controller. What we don't do here is take responsibility to adjust the voltages on those power-rails when ramping clock frequencies - PLL rates - inside of the clock-controller. That voltage adjustment should be performed by operating-point/performance setpoint code in the driver requesting the new frequency. There are some questions that it is worth discussing in the commit log: 1. Should there be a hierarchy of power-domains in the clock-controller ? In other words if a list of dtsi::power-domains = <pd_a, pd_b, ..> should a specific hierarchy be applied by the gdsc code somehow ? The short answer is no, you must properly represent power-domain dependencies in your dtsi. Do this: pd_a { compat = "qcom, power-domain-a"; power-domains = <&pd_c>; }; pd_b { compat = "qcom, power-domain-b"; }; pd_c { compat = "qcom, power-domain-c"; }; clock-controller { compat ="qcom, some-clock-controller"; power-domains = <&pd_a, &pd_b>; } Not this: pd_a { compat = "qcom, power-domain-a"; }; pd_b { compat = "qcom, power-domain-b"; }; pd_c { compat = "qcom, power-domain-c"; }; clock-controller { compat ="qcom, some-clock-controller"; power-domains = <&pd_c, &pd_a, &pd_b>; } 2. Should each GDSC inside a clock-controller be attached to each power-domain listed in dtsi::power-domains = <> ? In other words should child GDSCs attach to the power-domain list. The answer to this is no. GDSCs which are children of a GDSC within a clock-controller need only attach to the parent GDSC. With a single power-domain or a list of power-domains either way only the parent/top-level GDSC needs to be a subdomain of the input dtsi::power-domains = <>. 3. Should top-level GDSCs inside the clock-controller attach to each power-domain in the clock-controller. Yes a GDSC that has no parent GDSC inside of the clock-controller has an inferred dependency on the power-domains powering the clock-controller. 4. Performance states Right now the best information we have is that performance states should be applied to a power-domain list equally. Future implementations may have more detail to differentiate the option to vote for different voltages on different power-domains when setting clock frequencies. Either way setting the performance state of the power-domains for the clock-controller should be represented by operating-point code in the hardware driver which depends on the clocks not in the gdsc_enable()/gdsc_disable() path. Signed-off-by: Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@linaro.org> --- drivers/clk/qcom/common.c | 1 + drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.h | 1 + 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+)