[PATCH v6 20/41] ARM: da830: add new clock init using common clock framework

[Sekhar Nori]

On Friday 02 February 2018 11:33 PM, David Lechner wrote:
> On 02/02/2018 08:12 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>> On Saturday 20 January 2018 10:43 PM, David Lechner wrote:
>>>   void __init da830_init_time(void)
>>>   {
>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_COMMON_CLK
>>> +    void __iomem *pll0, *psc0, *psc1;
>>> +    struct clk *clk;
>>> +
>>> +    pll0 = ioremap(DA8XX_PLL0_BASE, SZ_4K);
>>> +    psc0 = ioremap(DA8XX_PSC0_BASE, SZ_4K);
>>> +    psc1 = ioremap(DA8XX_PSC1_BASE, SZ_4K);
>>> +
>>> +    da8xx_register_cfgchip();
>>> +
>>> +    clk_register_fixed_rate(NULL, "ref_clk", NULL, 0, DA830_REF_FREQ);
>>> +
>>> +    da830_pll_clk_init(pll0);
>>> +
>>> +    da830_psc_clk_init(psc0, psc1);
>>> +
>>
>>> +    clk = clk_register_fixed_factor(NULL, "i2c0", "pll0_aux_clk", 0,
>>> 1, 1);
>>> +    clk_register_clkdev(clk, NULL, "i2c_davinci.1");
>>> +
>>> +    clk = clk_register_fixed_factor(NULL, "timer0", "pll0_aux_clk",
>>> 0, 1, 1);
>>> +    clk_register_clkdev(clk, "timer0", NULL);
>>> +
>>> +    clk = clk_register_fixed_factor(NULL, "timer1", "pll0_aux_clk",
>>> 0, 1, 1);
>>> +    clk_register_clkdev(clk, NULL, "davinci-wdt");
>>
>> Isn't this better done in da830_pll_clk_init() ? I think we can get rid
>> of the dummy fixed factor clock too and directly use the pll0_auxclk.
> 
> 
> I considered it, but I kind of like keeping the fixed factor clocks for
> debugging purposes. If you just have "pll0_auxclk" the enable count is
> not helpful because you don't know which driver did the enabling.

I think it is better to more or less reflect the hardware here. We would
not be doing this in the DT case, for example.

I see your point on debugging. Such code can perhaps be temporarily
introduced if really debugging such an issue. This will be the case with
any shared clock.

Thanks,
Sekhar