Re: [PATCH RFC v5 2/2] clk: Add handling of clk parent and rate assigned from DT

[Laurent Pinchart]

On Friday 11 April 2014 14:25:49 Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> On 10/04/14 18:04, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 9, 2014 at 6:26 AM, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
> >> This patch adds a helper function to configure clock parents and
> >> rates as specified in clock-parents, clock-rates DT properties
> >> for a consumer device and a call to it before driver is bound to
> >> a device.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> 
> [...]
> 
> >> ---
> >> 
> >>  .../devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt   |   44 ++++++++++
> >>  drivers/base/platform.c                            |    5 ++
> >>  drivers/clk/Makefile                               |    3 +
> >>  drivers/clk/clk-conf.c                             |   85 ++++++++++++++
> >>  drivers/clk/clk.c                                  |   12 ++-
> >>  include/linux/clk/clk-conf.h                       |   19 +++++
> >>  6 files changed, 167 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>  create mode 100644 drivers/clk/clk-conf.c
> >>  create mode 100644 include/linux/clk/clk-conf.h
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt
> >> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt index
> >> 700e7aa..93513fc 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt
> >> @@ -132,3 +132,47 @@ clock signal, and a UART.
> >>    ("pll" and "pll-switched").
> >>  * The UART has its baud clock connected the external oscillator and its
> >>    register clock connected to the PLL clock (the "pll-switched" signal)
> >> +
> >> +==Assigned clock parents and rates==
> >> +
> >> +Some platforms require static initial configuration of parts of the
> >> clocks
> >> +controller. Such a configuration can be specified in a clock consumer
> >> node
> >> +through clock-parents and clock-rates DT properties. The former should
> >> +contain a list of parent clocks in form of phandle and clock specifier
> >> pairs,
> >> +the latter the list of assigned clock frequency values (one cell each).
> >> +To skip setting parent or rate of a clock its corresponding entry should
> >> be
> >> +set to 0, or can be omitted if it is not followed by any non-zero entry.
> >> +
> >> +    uart@a000 {
> >> +        compatible = "fsl,imx-uart";
> >> +        reg = <0xa000 0x1000>;
> >> +        ...
> >> +        clocks = <&clkcon 0>, <&clkcon 3>;
> >> +        clock-names = "baud", "mux";
> >> +
> >> +        clock-parents = <0>, <&pll 1>;
> >> +        clock-rates = <460800>;
> > 
> > Is this the input frequency or serial baud rate? Looks like a baud
> > rate, but the clock framework needs input (to the uart) frequency. I
> > would say this should be clock-frequency and specify the max baud rate
> > as is being done with i2c bindings. The uart driver should know how to
> > convert between input clock freq and baud rate.
> 
> This UART example is not quite representative for the issues I have been
> trying to address with this patch set. There is a need to set (an initial)
> input clock frequency. E.g. in case of multimedia devices there may be
> a need to set clock parent and frequency of an input clock to multiple IP
> blocks, so they are clocked synchronously and data is carried properly
> across a whole processing chain. Thus there may not be even clock output
> in an IP block, but still input clock needs to be set. IIUC there is
> similar issue with audio, where it is difficult to calculate the clock
> frequencies/determine parent clocks in individual drivers algorithmically.

Just to be used as an example, this is how the SMIA++ sensor driver computes 
the PLL parameters automatically based on the input frequency, desired output 
frequency and various hardware limits.

http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/drivers/media/i2c/smiapp-pll.c

See the code complexity and keep in mind that it only handles a single device 
with a single set of constraints and a single parent. If we add several 
devices to the mix, as well as selectable parents, there would indeed probably 
be no sane way to configure the clocks algorithmically.

> >> +    };
> >> +
> >> +In this example the pll is set as parent of "mux" clock and frequency
> >> of "baud"
> >> +clock is specified as 460800 Hz.
> > 
> > I don't really like clock-parents. The parent information is part of
> > the clock source, not the consumer.
> 
> I'm not sure we must always consider the parent information as property
> of a clock source. If for example we expose a structure like below as
> single clock object, supporting clock gating, parent and frequency
> setting the parent setting is still accessible from within a device
> driver. And clock parent selection may depend on a system configuration
> not immediately obvious from within a single device driver perspective.
> 
>                          MUX
>                        ,-------.     DIVIDER      GATE
> common clk source 1 -->|--.    |   ,--------.   ,--------.
>                        |   \   |   |        |   |        |
> common clk source 2 -->|-   '--|-->|        |-->|        |--> consumer
>        ...             |       |   |        |   |        |
> common clk source N -->|-      |   '--------'   '--------'
>                        '-------'
> 
> > We've somewhat decided against having every single clock defined in DT
> > and rather only describe a clock controller with leaf clocks to
> > devices. That is not a hard rule, but for complex clock trees that is
> > the norm. Doing something like this will require all levels of the
> > clock tree to be described. You may have multiple layers of parents
> > that have to be configured correctly. How are you configuring the rest
> > of the tree?
> 
> I believe even clock controllers where clocks are represented as flat
> array often describe the clock tree entirely by parenthood, the tree
> structure is just not obvious from the DT binding.
> In addition, there seems to be appearing more and more clock controller
> DT bindings describing their clocks individually.
> 
> >> +Configuring a clock's parent and rate through the device node that uses
> >> +the clock can be done only for clocks that have a single user.
> >> Specifying
> >> +conflicting parent or rate configuration in multiple consumer nodes for
> >> +a shared clock is forbidden.
> >> +
> >> +Configuration of common clocks, which affect multiple consumer devices
> >> +can be specified in a dedicated 'assigned-clocks' subnode of a clock
> >> +provider node, e.g.:
> >
> > This seems like a work-around due to having clock-parents in the
> > consumer node. If (I'm not convinced we should) we have a binding for
> > parent config, it needs to be a single binding that works for both
> > cases.
> 
> When this issue was first raised during an ARM kernel summit it was
> proposed to add 'assigned' prefix to DT properties for such bindings.
> 
> How about separate properties for the default clock configuration,
> e.g. assigned-clocks/assigned-clock-parents/assigned-clock-rates ?
> So a clock provider would look like:
> 
>     clkcon {
>         ...
>         #clock-cells = <1>;
> 
>         assigned-clocks = <&clkcon 16>, <&clkcon 17>;
>         assigned-clock-parents = <0>, <&clkcon 1>;
>         assigned-clock-rates = <200000>;
>     };
> 
> And a consumer device node:
> 
>     uart@a000 {
>         compatible = "fsl,imx-uart";
>         reg = <0xa000 0x1000>;
>         ...
>         clocks = <&clkcon 0>;
>         clock-names = "baud";
> 
>         assigned-clocks = <&clkcon 3>, <&clkcon 0>;
>         assigned-clock-parents = <&pll 1>;
>         assigned-clock-rates = <0>, <460800>;
> };
> 
> ?
> 
> >> +
> >> +    clkcon {
> >> +        ...
> >> +        #clock-cells = <1>;
> >> +
> >> +        assigned-clocks {
> >> +            clocks = <&clkcon 16>, <&clkcon 17>;
> >> +            clock-parents = <0>, <&clkcon 1>;
> >> +            clock-rates = <200000>;
> >> +        };
> >> +    };

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/