[PATCH v4 0/2] Add notifier for PLL0 clock and set it 1.5GHz on

Alexandre Ghiti alex at ghiti.fr
Wed Apr 24 13:32:29 PDT 2024


Hi Xingyu,

On 10/04/2024 05:31, Xingyu Wu wrote:
> This patch is to add the notifier for PLL0 clock and set the PLL0 rate
> to 1.5GHz to fix the lower rate of CPUfreq on the JH7110 SoC.
>
> The first patch is to add the notifier for PLL0 clock. Setting the PLL0
> rate need the son clock (cpu_root) to switch its parent clock to OSC
> clock and switch it back after setting PLL0 rate. It need to use the
> cpu_root clock from SYSCRG and register the notifier in the SYSCRG
> driver.
>
> The second patch is to set cpu_core rate to 500MHz and PLL0 rate to
> 1.5GHz to fix the problem about the lower rate of CPUfreq on the
> visionfive board. The cpu_core clock rate is set to 500MHz first to
> ensure that the cpu frequency will not suddenly become high and the cpu
> voltage is not enough to cause a crash when the PLL0 is set to 1.5GHz.
> The cpu voltage and frequency are then adjusted together by CPUfreq.
>
> Changes since v3:
> - Added the notifier for PLL0 clock.
> - Set cpu_core rate in DTS
>
> v3: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240402090920.11627-1-xingyu.wu@starfivetech.com/
>
> Changes since v2:
> - Made the steps into the process into the process of setting PLL0 rate
>
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230821152915.208366-1-xingyu.wu@starfivetech.com/
>
> Changes since v1:
> - Added the fixes tag in the commit.
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230811033631.160912-1-xingyu.wu@starfivetech.com/
>
> Xingyu Wu (2):
>    clk: starfive: jh7110-sys: Add notifier for PLL clock
>    riscv: dts: starfive: visionfive-2: Fix lower rate of CPUfreq by
>      setting PLL0 rate to 1.5GHz
>
>   .../jh7110-starfive-visionfive-2.dtsi         |  6 ++++
>   .../clk/starfive/clk-starfive-jh7110-sys.c    | 31 ++++++++++++++++++-
>   drivers/clk/starfive/clk-starfive-jh71x0.h    |  2 ++
>   3 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)


I only took a quick look so I'm not sure: does patch 2 depend on patch 
1? In that case, I think the Fixes tag should be applied to both patches.

And as this is a fix, will you respin a new version soon for 6.9?

Thanks,

Alex




More information about the linux-riscv mailing list