| Message ID | 20130723131406.GI19071@book.gsilab.sittig.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Quoting Gerhard Sittig (2013-07-23 06:14:06) > [ summary: "shared gate" support desirable? approach acceptable? ] > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 14:14 +0200, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > > > > this change implements a clock driver for the MPC512x PowerPC platform > > which follows the COMMON_CLK approach and uses common clock drivers > > shared with other platforms > > > > [ ... ] > > > > some of the clock items get pre-enabled in the clock driver to not have > > them automatically disabled by the underlying clock subsystem because of > > their being unused -- this approach is desirable because > > [ ... ] > > - some help introduce support for and migrate to the common > > infrastructure, while more appropriate support for specific hardware > > constraints isn't available yet (remaining changes are strictly > > internal to the clock driver and won't affect peripheral drivers) > > This remark was related to the CAN clocks of the MPC512x SoC. Gerhard, Thanks for the patch (way far down below here). I'll check into it to see if that implementation looks OK. It would be helpful if another platform with shared gates could weigh in on whether the implementation works for them. Still, a shared gate solution is not a prerequisite for this series, correct? Regards, Mike > > The clock subtrees which are involved in generating CAN bitrates > include one path from the XTAL to an internal MCLK (this is part > of the CCF support for the platform), and another path from the > MCLK or yet another IP bus clock to the actual bitrate on the > wire (this is taken care of within the mscan(4) driver). > > The MCLK generation for CAN is documented in the MPC5121e > Reference Manual, chapter 5, section 5.2.5 "MSCAN Clock > Generation". SYS, REF (both internal), PSC_MCLK_IN, and SPDIF_TX > (both external) are muxed, gated, and divided. The result is > muxed with IP. The result is fed into the MSCAN component and > gets muxed with IP again (can't tell why, maybe for backwards > compatibility). > > In parallel to this MCLK block there is SCCR2[25], the "BDLC and > MSCAN clock enable", documented in section 5.3.1.3 "System Clock > Control Register 2". So there is a gate that "somehow needs to > get setup" yet isn't part of the visible MCLK chain. > > The series up to and including v3 approaches the problem by > - adding a gate after the second MCLK mux, which gets exported > for client lookups and is the MCLK input for the mscan(4) > driver > - creating that gate for each of the four MSCAN clocks of the > SoC, all of them referencing the single "enable" bit in the > SCCR2 register > - pre-enabling the MSCAN clocks from within the clock driver, and > thus avoid having the clock disabled from the common > infrastructure, because disabling one of these clocks had > closed the shared gate and thus had broken all other clock uses > > > clkdev registration provides "alias names" for few clock items > > [ ... ] > > > [ ... ] > > + > > +/* setup the MCLK clock subtree of an individual PSC/MSCAN/SPDIF */ > > +static void mpc512x_clk_setup_mclk(struct mclk_setup_data *entry) > > +{ > > + size_t clks_idx_pub, clks_idx_int; > > + u32 __iomem *mccr_reg; /* MCLK control register (mux, en, div) */ > > + u32 __iomem *sccr_reg; /* system clock control register (enable) */ > > + int sccr_bit; > > + int div; > > + > > + /* derive a few parameters from the component type and index */ > > + switch (entry->type) { > > + case MCLK_TYPE_PSC: > > + clks_idx_pub = MPC512x_CLK_PSC0_MCLK + entry->comp_idx; > > + clks_idx_int = MPC512x_CLK_MCLKS_FIRST > > + + (entry->comp_idx) * MCLK_MAX_IDX; > > + mccr_reg = &clkregs->psc_ccr[entry->comp_idx]; > > + break; > > + case MCLK_TYPE_MSCAN: > > + clks_idx_pub = MPC512x_CLK_MSCAN0_MCLK + entry->comp_idx; > > + clks_idx_int = MPC512x_CLK_MCLKS_FIRST > > + + (NR_PSCS + entry->comp_idx) * MCLK_MAX_IDX; > > + mccr_reg = &clkregs->mscan_ccr[entry->comp_idx]; > > + break; > > + case MCLK_TYPE_SPDIF: > > + clks_idx_pub = MPC512x_CLK_SPDIF_MCLK; > > + clks_idx_int = MPC512x_CLK_MCLKS_FIRST > > + + (NR_PSCS + NR_MSCANS) * MCLK_MAX_IDX; > > + mccr_reg = &clkregs->spccr; > > + break; > > + default: > > + return; > > + } > > + if (entry->bit_sccr1 >= 0) { > > + sccr_reg = &clkregs->sccr1; > > + sccr_bit = entry->bit_sccr1; > > + } else if (entry->bit_sccr2 >= 0) { > > + sccr_reg = &clkregs->sccr2; > > + sccr_bit = entry->bit_sccr2; > > + } else { > > + sccr_reg = NULL; > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * this was grabbed from the PPC_CLOCK implementation, which > > + * enforced a specific MCLK divider while the clock was gated > > + * during setup (that's a documented hardware requirement) > > + * > > + * the PPC_CLOCK implementation might even have violated the > > + * "MCLK <= IPS" constraint, the fixed divider value of 1 > > + * results in a divider of 2 and thus MCLK = SYS/2 which equals > > + * CSB which is greater than IPS; the serial port setup may have > > + * adjusted the divider which the clock setup might have left in > > + * an undesirable state > > + * > > + * initial setup is: > > + * - MCLK 0 from SYS > > + * - MCLK DIV such to not exceed the IPS clock > > + * - MCLK 0 enabled > > + * - MCLK 1 from MCLK DIV > > + */ > > + div = clk_get_rate(clks[MPC512x_CLK_SYS]); > > + div /= clk_get_rate(clks[MPC512x_CLK_IPS]); > > + out_be32(mccr_reg, (0 << 16)); > > + out_be32(mccr_reg, (0 << 16) | ((div - 1) << 17)); > > + out_be32(mccr_reg, (1 << 16) | ((div - 1) << 17)); > > + > > + /* > > + * create the 'struct clk' items of the MCLK's clock subtree > > + * > > + * note that by design we always create all nodes and won't take > > + * shortcuts here, because > > + * - the "internal" MCLK_DIV and MCLK_OUT signal in turn are > > + * selectable inputs to the CFM while those who "actually use" > > + * the PSC/MSCAN/SPDIF (serial drivers et al) need the MCLK > > + * for their bitrate > > + * - in the absence of "aliases" for clocks we need to create > > + * individial 'struct clk' items for whatever might get > > + * referenced or looked up, even if several of those items are > > + * identical from the logical POV (their rate value) > > + * - for easier future maintenance and for better reflection of > > + * the SoC's documentation, it appears appropriate to generate > > + * clock items even for those muxers which actually are NOPs > > + * (those with two inputs of which one is reserved) > > + */ > > + clks[clks_idx_int + MCLK_IDX_MUX0] = mpc512x_clk_muxed( > > + entry->name_mux0, > > + &parent_names_mux0[0], ARRAY_SIZE(parent_names_mux0), > > + mccr_reg, 14, 2); > > + clks[clks_idx_int + MCLK_IDX_EN0] = mpc512x_clk_gated( > > + entry->name_en0, entry->name_mux0, > > + mccr_reg, 16); > > + clks[clks_idx_int + MCLK_IDX_DIV0] = mpc512x_clk_divider( > > + entry->name_div0, > > + entry->name_en0, CLK_SET_RATE_GATE, > > + mccr_reg, 17, 15, 0); > > + if (entry->has_mclk1) { > > + clks[clks_idx_int + MCLK_IDX_MUX1] = mpc512x_clk_muxed( > > + entry->name_mux1, > > + &entry->parent_names_mux1[0], > > + ARRAY_SIZE(entry->parent_names_mux1), > > + mccr_reg, 7, 1); > > + } else { > > + clks[clks_idx_int + MCLK_IDX_MUX1] = mpc512x_clk_factor( > > + entry->name_mux1, entry->parent_names_mux1[0], > > + 1, 1); > > + } > > + if (sccr_reg) { > > + clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated( > > + entry->name_mclk, > > + entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit); > > + } else { > > + clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_factor( > > + entry->name_mclk, > > + entry->name_mux1, 1, 1); > > + } > > + > > + /* > > + * without this "clock device" registration, "simple" lookups in > > + * the SPI master initialization and serial port setup will fail > > + * > > + * those drivers need to get adjusted to lookup their required > > + * clocks from device tree specs, and device tree nodes need to > > + * provide the clock specs, before this clkdev registration > > + * becomes obsolete > > + */ > > + clk_register_clkdev(clks[clks_idx_pub], entry->name_mclk, NULL); > > +} > > [ ... ] > > This was the routine which sets up _one_ MCLK block, note the > assignment at the routine's end to the "published" clock item > that's the gate's output after the second mux stage. > > > [ ... ] > > + clks[MPC512x_CLK_I2C] = mpc512x_clk_gated("i2c", "ips", > > + &clkregs->sccr2, 26); > > + mpc512x_clk_setup_mclks(mclk_mscan_data, ARRAY_SIZE(mclk_mscan_data)); > > + clks[MPC512x_CLK_SDHC] = mpc512x_clk_gated("sdhc", "sdhc-ug", > > + &clkregs->sccr2, 24); > > + mpc512x_clk_setup_mclks(mclk_spdif_data, ARRAY_SIZE(mclk_spdif_data)); > > [ ... ] > > This is the invocation of the routine which sets up four MCLK > blocks for the MSCAN components, while all of them refer to bit > 25 of SCCR2. > > > [ ... ] > > + > > + /* enable some of the clocks here unconditionally because ... */ > > + pr_debug("automatically enabling some clocks\n"); > > + /* some are essential yet never get claimed by any driver */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_DUMMY]); > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_E300]); /* PowerPC CPU */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_DDR]); /* DRAM */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_MEM]); /* SRAM */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_IPS]); /* SoC periph */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_LPC]); /* boot media */ > > + /* some are required yet no dependencies were declared */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_PSC_FIFO]); > > + /* some are not yet acquired by their respective drivers */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_PSC3_MCLK]);/* serial console */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_FEC]); /* network, NFS */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_DIU]); /* display */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_I2C]); > > + /* > > + * some have their individual clock subtree with separate clock > > + * items and their individual enable counters, yet share a > > + * common gate (refer to the same register location) while the > > + * common clock driver code is not aware of the fact and the > > + * platform's code doesn't provide specific support either > > + * > > + * what might happen is that e.g. enabling two MSCAN clock items > > + * and disabling one of them will disable the common gate and > > + * thus break the other MSCAN clock as well > > + */ > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_MSCAN0_MCLK]); > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_MSCAN1_MCLK]); > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_MSCAN2_MCLK]); > > + clk_prepare_enable(clks[MPC512x_CLK_MSCAN3_MCLK]); > > +} > > This is the pre-enable workaround for the MSCAN0 to MSCAN3 clock > items. > > The above approach does work in that it introduces complete > support for common clock on the MPC512x platform, with the CAN > component being operational, and the clock driver using shared > logic across platforms. > > The remaining issue is that regardless of whether CAN is used, > the (chip internal) clock is enabled. This may not be a problem > when bitrates aren't generated and the wire isn't driven. > > > The question now is how to correctly support the situation where > a gate is shared between subtrees yet isn't really part of any > path within the subtrees. I really cannot find a single spot > where to introduce the gate such that it's not duplicated. > > The appropriate solution would not be to pre-enable those clocks, > but to either introduce another gate clock type which supports a > shared reference, or to add support for the shared reference to > the existing gate code. > > > I'd rather not duplicate most or all of the code of clk-gate.c, > instead I looked into how to add "shared gate" support to the > existing driver. > > My question is whether the approach is acceptable. It adds > minimal overhead and shall be OK for the enable/disable path from > a technical POV. And it doesn't feel like too much of a stretch. > But there may be non-technical reasons to reject the approach. > I'd like to learn whether to follow that path before preparing > another version of the patch series. > > The diffs were taken with the '-w -b' options to demonstrate > their essence and not drown it in whitespace changes. The > implementation assumes that the caller which registers the gate > (the platform's clock driver) provides both the counter cell and > the lock. And that all gates with a "shared use counter" use the > same lock (which is satisfied as they all get registered from the > same spot in the platform's clock driver). > > The CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag addresses a different problem. The > SoC has four MSCAN components, while two of them are enabled in > the device tree (the other two are present but disabled). So > during probe two of the clocks get enabled. After probe all > unused clocks automatically get disabled (that's another two). > So the "shared use counter" drops to zero although components are > in use, because "disable, it's unused" isn't told from "disable > after enable, regular use". The flag would become obsolete if > the common gate logic would implement a separate disable_unused() > routine, but I guess this isn't necessary and the use of the flag > is appropriate. > > That the example use creates a field for just one counter is to > better demonstrate the use and potential extension as need > arises. Reducing this to a mere integer variable would be a > micro optimization. > > > The extension of the existing clk_gate implementation: > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > struct clk_gate *gate = to_clk_gate(hw); > int set = gate->flags & CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE ? 1 : 0; > unsigned long flags = 0; > + int need_reg_access; > u32 reg; > > set ^= enable; > @@ -53,6 +54,20 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > if (gate->lock) > spin_lock_irqsave(gate->lock, flags); > > + /* > + * if a "shared use counter" was specified, keep track of enable > + * and disable calls and only access hardware registers upon the > + * very first enable or very last disable call > + */ > + if (!gate->share_count) { > + need_reg_access = 1; > + } else if (enable) { > + need_reg_access = (*gate->share_count)++ == 0; > + } else { > + need_reg_access = --(*gate->share_count) == 0; > + } > + > + if (need_reg_access) { > if (gate->flags & CLK_GATE_HIWORD_MASK) { > reg = BIT(gate->bit_idx + 16); > if (set) > @@ -67,6 +82,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > } > > clk_writel(reg, gate->reg); > + } > > if (gate->lock) > spin_unlock_irqrestore(gate->lock, flags); > @@ -118,10 +134,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_gate_ops); > * @clk_gate_flags: gate-specific flags for this clock > * @lock: shared register lock for this clock > */ > -struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, > const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > - u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, > + int *share_count) > { > struct clk_gate *gate; > struct clk *clk; > @@ -152,6 +169,7 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > gate->bit_idx = bit_idx; > gate->flags = clk_gate_flags; > gate->lock = lock; > + gate->share_count = share_count; > gate->hw.init = &init; > > clk = clk_register(dev, &gate->hw); > @@ -161,3 +179,14 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > return clk; > } > + > +struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) > +{ > + > + return clk_register_gate_shared(dev, name, parent_name, flags, > + reg, bit_idx, clk_gate_flags, > + lock, NULL); > +} > --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h > +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h > @@ -222,6 +222,7 @@ struct clk_gate { > u8 bit_idx; > u8 flags; > spinlock_t *lock; > + int *share_count; > }; > > #define CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE BIT(0) > @@ -232,6 +233,11 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock); > +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, > + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, > + int *share_count); > > struct clk_div_table { > unsigned int val; > > > How to use these shared gates: > > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c > @@ -123,6 +123,39 @@ static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated( > reg, pos, 0, &clklock); > } > > +enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t { > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN, > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX, > +}; > + > +static int mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX]; > + > +/* > + * implementor's note: since clk_gate items don't implement a separate > + * .disable_unused() callback, their .disable() routine gets called and > + * "disable the clock as we can't see it's in use" cannot be told from > + * "regular disable, count these events please" > + * > + * passing the CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag upon clock creation will suppress > + * the "disable, unused" call, so use counts won't get unbalanced, the > + * clock either never got enabled and thus need not get disabled, or > + * part of the hardware got enabled while disabling the other part isn't > + * wanted > + */ > +static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( > + const char *name, const char *parent_name, > + u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, > + enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t share_id) > +{ > + int clkflags; > + > + clkflags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT; > + clkflags |= CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; > + return clk_register_gate_shared(NULL, name, parent_name, clkflags, > + reg, pos, 0, &clklock, > + &mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[share_id]); > +} > + > static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_muxed(const char *name, > const char **parent_names, int parent_count, > u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, u8 len) > @@ -520,9 +553,16 @@ static void mpc512x_clk_setup_mclk(struct mclk_setup_data *entry) > 1, 1); > } > if (sccr_reg) { > + if (entry->type == MCLK_TYPE_MSCAN) { > + clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( > + entry->name_mclk, > + entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit, > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN); > + } else { > clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated( > entry->name_mclk, > entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit); > + } > } else { > clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_factor( > entry->name_mclk, > > Local tests have shown that the extension solves the problem of > how to satisfy the SoC's constraints on the MPC512x platform. > The MSCAN clocks no longer need to get pre-enabled, instead they > get setup and enabled only as the mscan(4) driver probes devices > according to how it was instructed (device tree nodes). > > What do you think? Is the "shared gate" support in the common > logic appropriate? I'd rather not duplicate all of this code > just to introduce the specific gate I need, while most of the > logic is identical to the existing gate implementation. The > desire isn't to override the gate's operations, but to wrap them > and to consult a counter in addition, while the register access > still applies. > > > > virtually yours > Gerhard Sittig > -- > DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel > HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany > Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de
[ we are strictly talking about clocks and source code again, I have trimmed the CC: list to not spam the device tree ML or subsystem maintainers ] On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 16:30 -0700, Mike Turquette wrote: > > Quoting Gerhard Sittig (2013-07-23 06:14:06) > > [ summary: "shared gate" support desirable? approach acceptable? ] > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 14:14 +0200, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > > > > > > this change implements a clock driver for the MPC512x PowerPC platform > > > which follows the COMMON_CLK approach and uses common clock drivers > > > shared with other platforms > > > > > > [ ... ] > > > > > > some of the clock items get pre-enabled in the clock driver to not have > > > them automatically disabled by the underlying clock subsystem because of > > > their being unused -- this approach is desirable because > > > [ ... ] > > > - some help introduce support for and migrate to the common > > > infrastructure, while more appropriate support for specific hardware > > > constraints isn't available yet (remaining changes are strictly > > > internal to the clock driver and won't affect peripheral drivers) > > > > This remark was related to the CAN clocks of the MPC512x SoC. > > Gerhard, > > Thanks for the patch (way far down below here). I'll check into it to > see if that implementation looks OK. It would be helpful if another > platform with shared gates could weigh in on whether the implementation > works for them. > > Still, a shared gate solution is not a prerequisite for this series, > correct? Well, the recent CAN driver related discussion suggested that I had a mental misconception there. The need for "shared gates" was felt because of mixing up unrelated paths in the clock tree. But the MCLK subtree is for bitrate generation, while the BDLC gate is for register access into the peripheral controller. Currently I'm investigating how I can cleanly tell those individual aspects apart. Telling the gate for register access (in ARM speak often referred to as 'ipg') from the bitrate generation (the 'per' clock, or 'mclk' here) seems so much more appropriate. After clean separation, and more testing to make sure nothing gets broken throughout the series, there will be v4. So "shared gate" support might have become obsolete for the MPC512x platform. But if others need it, the outlined approach (patch below) may be viable. The change to the common code is minimal. The use in the platform's clock driver was kind of overengineered for the case of exactly one such gate, but this immediately makes it a working approach for several gates, if others need it. I'll trim the motivation and just leave the suggested approach for "shared gates" here. Feel free to drop it or to only resurrect it as the need may re-arise later. So far nobody appears to have felt the need up to now ... > > [ ... ] > > > > The question now is how to correctly support the situation where > > a gate is shared between subtrees yet isn't really part of any > > path within the subtrees. I really cannot find a single spot > > where to introduce the gate such that it's not duplicated. > > > > The appropriate solution would not be to pre-enable those clocks, > > but to either introduce another gate clock type which supports a > > shared reference, or to add support for the shared reference to > > the existing gate code. > > > > > > I'd rather not duplicate most or all of the code of clk-gate.c, > > instead I looked into how to add "shared gate" support to the > > existing driver. > > > > My question is whether the approach is acceptable. It adds > > minimal overhead and shall be OK for the enable/disable path from > > a technical POV. And it doesn't feel like too much of a stretch. > > But there may be non-technical reasons to reject the approach. > > I'd like to learn whether to follow that path before preparing > > another version of the patch series. > > > > The diffs were taken with the '-w -b' options to demonstrate > > their essence and not drown it in whitespace changes. The > > implementation assumes that the caller which registers the gate > > (the platform's clock driver) provides both the counter cell and > > the lock. And that all gates with a "shared use counter" use the > > same lock (which is satisfied as they all get registered from the > > same spot in the platform's clock driver). > > > > The CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag addresses a different problem. The > > SoC has four MSCAN components, while two of them are enabled in > > the device tree (the other two are present but disabled). So > > during probe two of the clocks get enabled. After probe all > > unused clocks automatically get disabled (that's another two). > > So the "shared use counter" drops to zero although components are > > in use, because "disable, it's unused" isn't told from "disable > > after enable, regular use". The flag would become obsolete if > > the common gate logic would implement a separate disable_unused() > > routine, but I guess this isn't necessary and the use of the flag > > is appropriate. > > > > That the example use creates a field for just one counter is to > > better demonstrate the use and potential extension as need > > arises. Reducing this to a mere integer variable would be a > > micro optimization. > > > > > > The extension of the existing clk_gate implementation: > > > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c > > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > > struct clk_gate *gate = to_clk_gate(hw); > > int set = gate->flags & CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE ? 1 : 0; > > unsigned long flags = 0; > > + int need_reg_access; > > u32 reg; > > > > set ^= enable; > > @@ -53,6 +54,20 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > > if (gate->lock) > > spin_lock_irqsave(gate->lock, flags); > > > > + /* > > + * if a "shared use counter" was specified, keep track of enable > > + * and disable calls and only access hardware registers upon the > > + * very first enable or very last disable call > > + */ > > + if (!gate->share_count) { > > + need_reg_access = 1; > > + } else if (enable) { > > + need_reg_access = (*gate->share_count)++ == 0; > > + } else { > > + need_reg_access = --(*gate->share_count) == 0; > > + } > > + > > + if (need_reg_access) { > > if (gate->flags & CLK_GATE_HIWORD_MASK) { > > reg = BIT(gate->bit_idx + 16); > > if (set) > > @@ -67,6 +82,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > > } > > > > clk_writel(reg, gate->reg); > > + } > > > > if (gate->lock) > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(gate->lock, flags); > > @@ -118,10 +134,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_gate_ops); > > * @clk_gate_flags: gate-specific flags for this clock > > * @lock: shared register lock for this clock > > */ > > -struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > - u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) > > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, > > + int *share_count) > > { > > struct clk_gate *gate; > > struct clk *clk; > > @@ -152,6 +169,7 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > gate->bit_idx = bit_idx; > > gate->flags = clk_gate_flags; > > gate->lock = lock; > > + gate->share_count = share_count; > > gate->hw.init = &init; > > > > clk = clk_register(dev, &gate->hw); > > @@ -161,3 +179,14 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > > return clk; > > } > > + > > +struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) > > +{ > > + > > + return clk_register_gate_shared(dev, name, parent_name, flags, > > + reg, bit_idx, clk_gate_flags, > > + lock, NULL); > > +} > > --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h > > +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h > > @@ -222,6 +222,7 @@ struct clk_gate { > > u8 bit_idx; > > u8 flags; > > spinlock_t *lock; > > + int *share_count; > > }; > > > > #define CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE BIT(0) > > @@ -232,6 +233,11 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock); > > +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, > > + int *share_count); > > > > struct clk_div_table { > > unsigned int val; > > > > > > How to use these shared gates: > > > > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c > > @@ -123,6 +123,39 @@ static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated( > > reg, pos, 0, &clklock); > > } > > > > +enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t { > > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN, > > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX, > > +}; > > + > > +static int mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX]; > > + > > +/* > > + * implementor's note: since clk_gate items don't implement a separate > > + * .disable_unused() callback, their .disable() routine gets called and > > + * "disable the clock as we can't see it's in use" cannot be told from > > + * "regular disable, count these events please" > > + * > > + * passing the CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag upon clock creation will suppress > > + * the "disable, unused" call, so use counts won't get unbalanced, the > > + * clock either never got enabled and thus need not get disabled, or > > + * part of the hardware got enabled while disabling the other part isn't > > + * wanted > > + */ > > +static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( > > + const char *name, const char *parent_name, > > + u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, > > + enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t share_id) > > +{ > > + int clkflags; > > + > > + clkflags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT; > > + clkflags |= CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; > > + return clk_register_gate_shared(NULL, name, parent_name, clkflags, > > + reg, pos, 0, &clklock, > > + &mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[share_id]); > > +} > > + > > static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_muxed(const char *name, > > const char **parent_names, int parent_count, > > u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, u8 len) > > @@ -520,9 +553,16 @@ static void mpc512x_clk_setup_mclk(struct mclk_setup_data *entry) > > 1, 1); > > } > > if (sccr_reg) { > > + if (entry->type == MCLK_TYPE_MSCAN) { > > + clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( > > + entry->name_mclk, > > + entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit, > > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN); > > + } else { > > clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated( > > entry->name_mclk, > > entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit); > > + } > > } else { > > clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_factor( > > entry->name_mclk, > > > > Local tests have shown that the extension solves the problem of > > how to satisfy the SoC's constraints on the MPC512x platform. > > The MSCAN clocks no longer need to get pre-enabled, instead they > > get setup and enabled only as the mscan(4) driver probes devices > > according to how it was instructed (device tree nodes). > > > > What do you think? Is the "shared gate" support in the common > > logic appropriate? I'd rather not duplicate all of this code > > just to introduce the specific gate I need, while most of the > > logic is identical to the existing gate implementation. The > > desire isn't to override the gate's operations, but to wrap them > > and to consult a counter in addition, while the register access > > still applies. virtually yours Gerhard Sittig
Quoting Gerhard Sittig (2013-08-03 07:39:56) > [ we are strictly talking about clocks and source code again, > I have trimmed the CC: list to not spam the device tree ML or > subsystem maintainers ] > > On Fri, Aug 02, 2013 at 16:30 -0700, Mike Turquette wrote: > > > > Quoting Gerhard Sittig (2013-07-23 06:14:06) > > > [ summary: "shared gate" support desirable? approach acceptable? ] > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 14:14 +0200, Gerhard Sittig wrote: > > > > > > > > this change implements a clock driver for the MPC512x PowerPC platform > > > > which follows the COMMON_CLK approach and uses common clock drivers > > > > shared with other platforms > > > > > > > > [ ... ] > > > > > > > > some of the clock items get pre-enabled in the clock driver to not have > > > > them automatically disabled by the underlying clock subsystem because of > > > > their being unused -- this approach is desirable because > > > > [ ... ] > > > > - some help introduce support for and migrate to the common > > > > infrastructure, while more appropriate support for specific hardware > > > > constraints isn't available yet (remaining changes are strictly > > > > internal to the clock driver and won't affect peripheral drivers) > > > > > > This remark was related to the CAN clocks of the MPC512x SoC. > > > > Gerhard, > > > > Thanks for the patch (way far down below here). I'll check into it to > > see if that implementation looks OK. It would be helpful if another > > platform with shared gates could weigh in on whether the implementation > > works for them. > > > > Still, a shared gate solution is not a prerequisite for this series, > > correct? > > Well, the recent CAN driver related discussion suggested that I > had a mental misconception there. The need for "shared gates" > was felt because of mixing up unrelated paths in the clock tree. > But the MCLK subtree is for bitrate generation, while the BDLC > gate is for register access into the peripheral controller. > > Currently I'm investigating how I can cleanly tell those > individual aspects apart. Telling the gate for register access > (in ARM speak often referred to as 'ipg') from the bitrate > generation (the 'per' clock, or 'mclk' here) seems so much more > appropriate. > > After clean separation, and more testing to make sure nothing > gets broken throughout the series, there will be v4. > > > So "shared gate" support might have become obsolete for the > MPC512x platform. But if others need it, the outlined approach > (patch below) may be viable. The change to the common code is > minimal. The use in the platform's clock driver was kind of > overengineered for the case of exactly one such gate, but this > immediately makes it a working approach for several gates, if > others need it. > > I'll trim the motivation and just leave the suggested approach > for "shared gates" here. Feel free to drop it or to only > resurrect it as the need may re-arise later. So far nobody > appears to have felt the need up to now ... You can drop it. If your platform does not need it and nobody else has said that they require shared gates then there is no reason to spend more time on it. Regards, Mike > > > > [ ... ] > > > > > > The question now is how to correctly support the situation where > > > a gate is shared between subtrees yet isn't really part of any > > > path within the subtrees. I really cannot find a single spot > > > where to introduce the gate such that it's not duplicated. > > > > > > The appropriate solution would not be to pre-enable those clocks, > > > but to either introduce another gate clock type which supports a > > > shared reference, or to add support for the shared reference to > > > the existing gate code. > > > > > > > > > I'd rather not duplicate most or all of the code of clk-gate.c, > > > instead I looked into how to add "shared gate" support to the > > > existing driver. > > > > > > My question is whether the approach is acceptable. It adds > > > minimal overhead and shall be OK for the enable/disable path from > > > a technical POV. And it doesn't feel like too much of a stretch. > > > But there may be non-technical reasons to reject the approach. > > > I'd like to learn whether to follow that path before preparing > > > another version of the patch series. > > > > > > The diffs were taken with the '-w -b' options to demonstrate > > > their essence and not drown it in whitespace changes. The > > > implementation assumes that the caller which registers the gate > > > (the platform's clock driver) provides both the counter cell and > > > the lock. And that all gates with a "shared use counter" use the > > > same lock (which is satisfied as they all get registered from the > > > same spot in the platform's clock driver). > > > > > > The CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag addresses a different problem. The > > > SoC has four MSCAN components, while two of them are enabled in > > > the device tree (the other two are present but disabled). So > > > during probe two of the clocks get enabled. After probe all > > > unused clocks automatically get disabled (that's another two). > > > So the "shared use counter" drops to zero although components are > > > in use, because "disable, it's unused" isn't told from "disable > > > after enable, regular use". The flag would become obsolete if > > > the common gate logic would implement a separate disable_unused() > > > routine, but I guess this isn't necessary and the use of the flag > > > is appropriate. > > > > > > That the example use creates a field for just one counter is to > > > better demonstrate the use and potential extension as need > > > arises. Reducing this to a mere integer variable would be a > > > micro optimization. > > > > > > > > > The extension of the existing clk_gate implementation: > > > > > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c > > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c > > > @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > > > struct clk_gate *gate = to_clk_gate(hw); > > > int set = gate->flags & CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE ? 1 : 0; > > > unsigned long flags = 0; > > > + int need_reg_access; > > > u32 reg; > > > > > > set ^= enable; > > > @@ -53,6 +54,20 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > > > if (gate->lock) > > > spin_lock_irqsave(gate->lock, flags); > > > > > > + /* > > > + * if a "shared use counter" was specified, keep track of enable > > > + * and disable calls and only access hardware registers upon the > > > + * very first enable or very last disable call > > > + */ > > > + if (!gate->share_count) { > > > + need_reg_access = 1; > > > + } else if (enable) { > > > + need_reg_access = (*gate->share_count)++ == 0; > > > + } else { > > > + need_reg_access = --(*gate->share_count) == 0; > > > + } > > > + > > > + if (need_reg_access) { > > > if (gate->flags & CLK_GATE_HIWORD_MASK) { > > > reg = BIT(gate->bit_idx + 16); > > > if (set) > > > @@ -67,6 +82,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) > > > } > > > > > > clk_writel(reg, gate->reg); > > > + } > > > > > > if (gate->lock) > > > spin_unlock_irqrestore(gate->lock, flags); > > > @@ -118,10 +134,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_gate_ops); > > > * @clk_gate_flags: gate-specific flags for this clock > > > * @lock: shared register lock for this clock > > > */ > > > -struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > > void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > > - u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) > > > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, > > > + int *share_count) > > > { > > > struct clk_gate *gate; > > > struct clk *clk; > > > @@ -152,6 +169,7 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > gate->bit_idx = bit_idx; > > > gate->flags = clk_gate_flags; > > > gate->lock = lock; > > > + gate->share_count = share_count; > > > gate->hw.init = &init; > > > > > > clk = clk_register(dev, &gate->hw); > > > @@ -161,3 +179,14 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > > > > return clk; > > > } > > > + > > > +struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) > > > +{ > > > + > > > + return clk_register_gate_shared(dev, name, parent_name, flags, > > > + reg, bit_idx, clk_gate_flags, > > > + lock, NULL); > > > +} > > > --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h > > > @@ -222,6 +222,7 @@ struct clk_gate { > > > u8 bit_idx; > > > u8 flags; > > > spinlock_t *lock; > > > + int *share_count; > > > }; > > > > > > #define CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE BIT(0) > > > @@ -232,6 +233,11 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > > void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > > u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock); > > > +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, > > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, > > > + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, > > > + int *share_count); > > > > > > struct clk_div_table { > > > unsigned int val; > > > > > > > > > How to use these shared gates: > > > > > > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c > > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c > > > @@ -123,6 +123,39 @@ static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated( > > > reg, pos, 0, &clklock); > > > } > > > > > > +enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t { > > > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN, > > > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX, > > > +}; > > > + > > > +static int mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX]; > > > + > > > +/* > > > + * implementor's note: since clk_gate items don't implement a separate > > > + * .disable_unused() callback, their .disable() routine gets called and > > > + * "disable the clock as we can't see it's in use" cannot be told from > > > + * "regular disable, count these events please" > > > + * > > > + * passing the CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag upon clock creation will suppress > > > + * the "disable, unused" call, so use counts won't get unbalanced, the > > > + * clock either never got enabled and thus need not get disabled, or > > > + * part of the hardware got enabled while disabling the other part isn't > > > + * wanted > > > + */ > > > +static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( > > > + const char *name, const char *parent_name, > > > + u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, > > > + enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t share_id) > > > +{ > > > + int clkflags; > > > + > > > + clkflags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT; > > > + clkflags |= CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; > > > + return clk_register_gate_shared(NULL, name, parent_name, clkflags, > > > + reg, pos, 0, &clklock, > > > + &mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[share_id]); > > > +} > > > + > > > static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_muxed(const char *name, > > > const char **parent_names, int parent_count, > > > u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, u8 len) > > > @@ -520,9 +553,16 @@ static void mpc512x_clk_setup_mclk(struct mclk_setup_data *entry) > > > 1, 1); > > > } > > > if (sccr_reg) { > > > + if (entry->type == MCLK_TYPE_MSCAN) { > > > + clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( > > > + entry->name_mclk, > > > + entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit, > > > + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN); > > > + } else { > > > clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated( > > > entry->name_mclk, > > > entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit); > > > + } > > > } else { > > > clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_factor( > > > entry->name_mclk, > > > > > > Local tests have shown that the extension solves the problem of > > > how to satisfy the SoC's constraints on the MPC512x platform. > > > The MSCAN clocks no longer need to get pre-enabled, instead they > > > get setup and enabled only as the mscan(4) driver probes devices > > > according to how it was instructed (device tree nodes). > > > > > > What do you think? Is the "shared gate" support in the common > > > logic appropriate? I'd rather not duplicate all of this code > > > just to introduce the specific gate I need, while most of the > > > logic is identical to the existing gate implementation. The > > > desire isn't to override the gate's operations, but to wrap them > > > and to consult a counter in addition, while the register access > > > still applies. > > > virtually yours > Gerhard Sittig > -- > DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel > HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr. 5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany > Phone: +49-8142-66989-0 Fax: +49-8142-66989-80 Email: office@denx.de
--- a/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c @@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) struct clk_gate *gate = to_clk_gate(hw); int set = gate->flags & CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE ? 1 : 0; unsigned long flags = 0; + int need_reg_access; u32 reg; set ^= enable; @@ -53,6 +54,20 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) if (gate->lock) spin_lock_irqsave(gate->lock, flags); + /* + * if a "shared use counter" was specified, keep track of enable + * and disable calls and only access hardware registers upon the + * very first enable or very last disable call + */ + if (!gate->share_count) { + need_reg_access = 1; + } else if (enable) { + need_reg_access = (*gate->share_count)++ == 0; + } else { + need_reg_access = --(*gate->share_count) == 0; + } + + if (need_reg_access) { if (gate->flags & CLK_GATE_HIWORD_MASK) { reg = BIT(gate->bit_idx + 16); if (set) @@ -67,6 +82,7 @@ static void clk_gate_endisable(struct clk_hw *hw, int enable) } clk_writel(reg, gate->reg); + } if (gate->lock) spin_unlock_irqrestore(gate->lock, flags); @@ -118,10 +134,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_gate_ops); * @clk_gate_flags: gate-specific flags for this clock * @lock: shared register lock for this clock */ -struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, - u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, + int *share_count) { struct clk_gate *gate; struct clk *clk; @@ -152,6 +169,7 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, gate->bit_idx = bit_idx; gate->flags = clk_gate_flags; gate->lock = lock; + gate->share_count = share_count; gate->hw.init = &init; clk = clk_register(dev, &gate->hw); @@ -161,3 +179,14 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, return clk; } + +struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock) +{ + + return clk_register_gate_shared(dev, name, parent_name, flags, + reg, bit_idx, clk_gate_flags, + lock, NULL); +} --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h @@ -222,6 +222,7 @@ struct clk_gate { u8 bit_idx; u8 flags; spinlock_t *lock; + int *share_count; }; #define CLK_GATE_SET_TO_DISABLE BIT(0) @@ -232,6 +233,11 @@ struct clk *clk_register_gate(struct device *dev, const char *name, const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock); +struct clk *clk_register_gate_shared(struct device *dev, const char *name, + const char *parent_name, unsigned long flags, + void __iomem *reg, u8 bit_idx, + u8 clk_gate_flags, spinlock_t *lock, + int *share_count); struct clk_div_table { unsigned int val; How to use these shared gates: --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/512x/clock-commonclk.c @@ -123,6 +123,39 @@ static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated( reg, pos, 0, &clklock); } +enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t { + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN, + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX, +}; + +static int mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MAX]; + +/* + * implementor's note: since clk_gate items don't implement a separate + * .disable_unused() callback, their .disable() routine gets called and + * "disable the clock as we can't see it's in use" cannot be told from + * "regular disable, count these events please" + * + * passing the CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag upon clock creation will suppress + * the "disable, unused" call, so use counts won't get unbalanced, the + * clock either never got enabled and thus need not get disabled, or + * part of the hardware got enabled while disabling the other part isn't + * wanted + */ +static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( + const char *name, const char *parent_name, + u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, + enum mpc512x_clk_shared_gate_id_t share_id) +{ + int clkflags; + + clkflags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT; + clkflags |= CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED; + return clk_register_gate_shared(NULL, name, parent_name, clkflags, + reg, pos, 0, &clklock, + &mpc512x_clk_gate_counters[share_id]); +} + static inline struct clk *mpc512x_clk_muxed(const char *name, const char **parent_names, int parent_count, u32 __iomem *reg, u8 pos, u8 len) @@ -520,9 +553,16 @@ static void mpc512x_clk_setup_mclk(struct mclk_setup_data *entry) 1, 1); } if (sccr_reg) { + if (entry->type == MCLK_TYPE_MSCAN) { + clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated_shared( + entry->name_mclk, + entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit, + MPC512x_CLK_SHARED_GATE_MSCAN); + } else { clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_gated( entry->name_mclk, entry->name_mux1, sccr_reg, sccr_bit); + } } else { clks[clks_idx_pub] = mpc512x_clk_factor( entry->name_mclk,