-----Original Message----- From: Doug Anderson dianders@chromium.org Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2022 12:55 AM To: quic_vpolimer quic_vpolimer@quicinc.com Cc: dri-devel dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org; linux-arm-msm <linux-arm- msm@vger.kernel.org>; freedreno freedreno@lists.freedesktop.org; open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS devicetree@vger.kernel.org; LKML linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Rob Clark robdclark@gmail.com; Stephen Boyd swboyd@chromium.org; quic_kalyant quic_kalyant@quicinc.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] drm/msm/disp/dpu1: set mdp clk to the maximum frequency in opp table during probe
WARNING: This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
Hi,
On Tue, Mar 8, 2022 at 8:55 AM Vinod Polimera quic_vpolimer@quicinc.com wrote:
use max clock during probe/bind sequence from the opp table. The clock will be scaled down when framework sends an update.
Signed-off-by: Vinod Polimera quic_vpolimer@quicinc.com
drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/dpu1/dpu_kms.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
In addition to Dmitry's requests, can you also make this patch #1 in the series since the DTS stuff really ought to come _after_ this one.
...and actually, thinking about it further:
- If we land this fix, we actually don't _need_ the dts patches,
right? Sure, the clock rate will get assigned before probe but then we'll change it right away in probe, right?
- If we land the dts patches _before_ the driver patch then it will
be a regression, right?
- The dts patches and driver patch will probably land through
separate trees. The driver patch will go through the MSM DRM tree and the device tree patches through the Qualcomm armsoc tree, right?
Assuming that the above is right, we should:
- Put the driver patch first.
Moved driver patch first.
- Remove the "Fixes" tag on the dts patches. I guess in theory we
could have a FIxes tag on this patch?
- Removed fixed tag on dt patches and added on driver patch.
- Note in the dts patches commit messages that they depend on the driver
patch.
- Added dependency patch on driver patch for dt patch.
- Delay the dts patches until the driver change has made it to mainline.
Does that sound reasonable?