On 08/06/15 14:51, Jon Medhurst (Tixy) wrote:
On Mon, 2015-06-08 at 11:40 +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote: [...]+ + scpi { + compatible = "arm,scpi"; + mboxes = <&mailbox 1>; + shmem = <&cpu_scp_hpri>; + + clocks { + compatible = "arm,scpi-clocks"; + + scpi_dvfs: scpi_clocks@0 { + compatible = "arm,scpi-dvfs-clocks"; + #clock-cells = <1>; + clock-indices = <0>, <1>, <2>; + clock-output-names = "vbig", "vlittle", "vgpu";From where do the clock names derive? They look more like names for voltage domains rather than clocks. My (admittedly very old) Juno docs, have the clocks as ATLCLK, APLCLK and GPUCLK.
I agree, I just copied it from SCPI spec which just deals with power domain names in the context of DVFS. I will update as per Juno doc.
+ }; + scpi_clk: scpi_clocks@3 { + compatible = "arm,scpi-variable-clocks"; + #clock-cells = <1>; + clock-indices = <3>, <4>; + clock-output-names = "pxlclk0", "pxlclk1";Can we also have clock index 5, name 'i2s_clk', for used by audio? (I don't know what other clocks the SCP currently supports, but audio is one being currently used by the out-of-tree code).
I will update.
Also, I believe that both display outputs share the same clock, and so pxlclk0 and pxlclk1 can't be controlled independently. But I guess these device-tree entries are for the interface to the SCP firmware, not the hardware, and if that pretends the clocks are independent...
Yes, this is bit tricky, I will let Liviu answer this. Regards, Sudeep -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
