From patchwork Sun Feb 25 16:06:15 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Andre Przywara X-Patchwork-Id: 776129 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6DD91758E; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 16:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708877278; cv=none; b=Ch3WLixCtl5IUv6U/YnKDZzi1QKhPBSZET3vm+J5orV/QF0B4PPZqVlOI6SBS1ur5/LKtCO+MIczVt2KFmERCqntfe3GuQh7BZBc6CaYWrJgRuHPw4lMJUZLB07iReUjJkd6cU5k2U/LUTUkY7FCZD58gynVzbMdLV2DnRJGdqQ= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708877278; c=relaxed/simple; bh=9eVf+dLCV/gAeiuLnMXIrWtXA4B8CEkB3FNsi7wdrTI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; b=AtT2q4rhpTuhAezdF43/i7OhoN8ViLrO6F568MxNchhm0duFTXtLB8Mj+NunYrvScp3RuLR6YhvM/7XkD7hzFL3zn1Ak+xU8p9RpfMFR1APgKQTAfSGqgAbc/T3OP90UYoy+r1lN3Wzgu2UKyt38iCNUDrmPLAtZU24+7HFaqJ4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABD161042; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 08:08:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 387273F73F; Sun, 25 Feb 2024 08:07:47 -0800 (PST) From: Andre Przywara To: Ulf Hansson , Jernej Skrabec , Chen-Yu Tsai , Samuel Holland , Michael Turquette , Stephen Boyd Cc: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/1] sunxi: H616: add GPU power domain driver Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2024 16:06:15 +0000 Message-Id: <20240225160616.15001-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.35.8 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 The Allwinner provided BSP code and experiments show that the Mali GPU on the Allwinner H616 SoC needs to have a bit in one PRCM register cleared to work. In the WIP graphics support patches, this was typically covered by a U-Boot one-liner hack. This patch here adds a proper power-domain driver for this one bit. Since "power-domains" is a generic DT property, it already works on the Panfrost driver side, without extra code. Said register is in the PRCM MMIO range, which we already use in the R-CCU driver, so add the power domain registration code there. I mark this as RFC to get answers to some questions. Once people are happy with the approach, I will send out a proper series with the respective Kconfig and DT patches. - Is modelling this as a power domain the right approach in the first place? Is that maybe just another reset bit? The logic seems backwards for that (bit set = disabled), but who knows? - Is embedding this in the R-CCU driver the right way? I also have a version for a standalone driver in a separate file, but we have to artificially split the MMIO region to not conflict with the R-CCU driver, which looks arbitrary. If anyone has any information about the PRCM (register map), it would help to make an informed decision. - Experiments in U-Boot identify bit 0 in 0x7010260 as behaving similar as our bit 0 in 0x7010254 here, so chances are there is another power domain for some other peripheral nearby. Also bits 0x7010250[9:0] are writable and stick, with setting bit 2 hanging the chip. So to allow further extensions without breaking compatibility, I made this a one-cell power domain ("power-domains = <&r_ccu 0>;"). Please let me know if this sounds overkill and a simple ("no cell") approach would be better. - This patch makes the R-CCU driver dependent on CONFIG_PM. Shall we model this is a simple "select" or "depends on" in Kconfig, or shall the code be made conditional in the R-CCU driver, to allow compilation without PM support enabled? - Shall any failure in registering the PPU driver also abort the R-CCU probe? Or do we treat this as optional? I'd be grateful for any feedback. Cheers, Andre Andre Przywara (1): clk: sunxi-ng: h6-r: add GPU power domain drivers/clk/sunxi-ng/ccu-sun50i-h6-r.c | 84 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 84 insertions(+)