Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: Add 32k clk on rk3399-gru

[Doug Anderson]

Hi,

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 3:23 PM Derek Basehore <dbasehore@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> This adds the 32k clock to the RK3399 Gru board file. Even though it's
> not directly used, muxes will end up traversing the entire clk tree on
> calls to determine_rate if it doesn't exist. This is because the 32k
> clk is listed as a possible parent on some clks. Since the clk doesn't
> know about the 32k clk (it was never registered), it triggers a global
> search for it. This can happen about 40 times per second, which isn't
> great for power.

I seem to remember Heiko requesting something be added to the commit
message.  Ah yes, he said:

> That would also be a great part of the commit message, like
> "...on Gru boards the 32kHz clock gets produced by a Silego oscillator"
> or so when you move it over to rk3399-gru.dtsi .

Presumably Heiko could add that to the commit message when he applies
the patch, so maybe wait to see if he wants you to respin it?


> Signed-off-by: Derek Basehore <dbasehore@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-gru.dtsi | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-gru.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-gru.dtsi
> index ca07f6032200..a07aa4c570c0 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-gru.dtsi
> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399-gru.dtsi
> @@ -14,6 +14,13 @@
>                 stdout-path = "serial2:115200n8";
>         };
>
> +       ap_rtc_clk: ap-rtc-clk {
> +               compatible = "fixed-clock";
> +               clock-frequency = <32768>;
> +               clock-output-names = "xin32k";
> +               #clock-cells = <0>;
> +       };
> +
>         /*
>          * Power Tree

Really this should be below the power tree, AKA right above
"gpio-keys".  Convention has typically been that only "special" nodes
like "chosen" go all the way at the top here.  Then the power tree
(parents first), then other nodes.

In the Chrome OS tree we had an "/* END REGULATORS */ comment to try
to separate out the power tree from the rest of the nodes, but I guess
Heiko didn't like that when this went upstream so now you just have to
know the convention.  :-P

Possibly Heiko would re-sort this for you himself when applying the
change if he agrees with my understanding of the conventions.

Other than my nits:

Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx>