Re: [PATCH v5 1/1] cpufreq: ti: Add EPROBE_DEFER for K3 SoCs

[Zhongqiu Han]

On 6/3/2026 3:24 PM, Akashdeep Kaur wrote:
> On K3 SoCs, ti-cpufreq relies on k3-socinfo to register the SoC
> device before soc_device_match() can return valid revision
> information. If ti-cpufreq probes before k3-socinfo,
> soc_device_match() returns NULL, leading to incorrect CPU frequency
> scaling behavior.
>
> Add a needs_k3_socinfo flag to ti_cpufreq_soc_data (similar to
> the existing multi_regulator pattern) to defer probe when k3-socinfo
> hasn't registered the SoC device yet.
>
> Signed-off-by: Akashdeep Kaur <a-kaur@xxxxxx>


Looks good to me with small one nit inline.

Reviewed-by: Zhongqiu Han <zhongqiu.han@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


> ---
>   drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c | 10 ++++++++++
>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> index a01abc1622eb..f2c8d9e3a1b5 100644
> --- a/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> +++ b/drivers/cpufreq/ti-cpufreq.c
> @@ -99,6 +99,7 @@ struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data {
>   	unsigned long efuse_shift;
>   	unsigned long rev_offset;
>   	bool multi_regulator;
> +	bool needs_k3_socinfo;
>   /* Backward compatibility hack: Might have missing syscon */
>   #define TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_MAY_BE_MISSING	0x1
>   /* Backward compatibility hack: new syscon size is 1 register wide */
> @@ -347,6 +348,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am625_soc_data = {
>   	.efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
>   	.efuse_shift = 0x6,
>   	.multi_regulator = false,
> +	.needs_k3_socinfo = true,
>   	.quirks = TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_IS_SINGLE_REG,
>   };
>
> @@ -356,6 +358,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62a7_soc_data = {
>   	.efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
>   	.efuse_shift = 0x6,
>   	.multi_regulator = false,
> +	.needs_k3_socinfo = true,
>   };
>
>   static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62l3_soc_data = {
> @@ -364,6 +367,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62l3_soc_data = {
>   	.efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
>   	.efuse_shift = 0x6,
>   	.multi_regulator = false,
> +	.needs_k3_socinfo = true,
>   };
>
>   static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62p5_soc_data = {
> @@ -372,6 +376,7 @@ static struct ti_cpufreq_soc_data am62p5_soc_data = {
>   	.efuse_mask = 0x07c0,
>   	.efuse_shift = 0x6,
>   	.multi_regulator = false,
> +	.needs_k3_socinfo = true,
>   };
>
>   /**
> @@ -443,6 +448,11 @@ static int ti_cpufreq_get_rev(struct ti_cpufreq_data *opp_data,
>   		goto done;
>   	}
>
> +	/* Defer if k3-socinfo hasn't registered the SoC device yet */
> +	if (opp_data->soc_data->needs_k3_socinfo)
> +		return dev_err_probe(opp_data->cpu_dev, -EPROBE_DEFER,
> +				     "SoC device not registered by k3-socinfo\n");


Nit: dev_err_probe() attaches the defer reason to cpu_dev instead of the
ti-cpufreq platform device, so devices_deferred won't show it, right

That said, this matches the existing pattern in ti_cpufreq_probe() where
all dev_err/dev_dbg calls use opp_data->cpu_dev.

If so, maybe it could be cleaned up in a separate patch.


> +
>   	ret = regmap_read(opp_data->syscon, opp_data->soc_data->rev_offset,
>   			  &revision);
>   	if (opp_data->soc_data->quirks & TI_QUIRK_SYSCON_MAY_BE_MISSING && ret == -EIO) {
> --
> 2.34.1


--
Thx and BRs,
Zhongqiu Han