[PATCH 1/3] ARM: kernel: get cpu clock rate from cpu clock node first

[Lorenzo Pieralisi]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2013 at 03:39:04PM +0100, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> The current topology code will only attempt to parse a "clock-frequency"
> property for a given CPU node. Some platforms such as the ecx-2000
> provide a clock node. Change the logic to first look for a clock node,
> and if we fail, fallback to parsing a "clock-frequency" property. To
> avoid unnecessary casting, change rate from u32 to unsigned long, and
> introduce the "prop" variable to hold the contents of the
> "clock-frequency" property.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli at gmail.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm/kernel/topology.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> index c5a5954..8f340a1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/kernel/topology.c
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@
>  #include <linux/of.h>
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
>  
>  #include <asm/cputype.h>
>  #include <asm/topology.h>
> @@ -104,7 +105,9 @@ static void __init parse_dt_topology(void)
>  	cpu_capacity = kzalloc(alloc_size, GFP_NOWAIT);
>  
>  	while ((cn = of_find_node_by_type(cn, "cpu"))) {
> -		const u32 *rate, *reg;
> +		const u32 *prop, *reg;
> +		unsigned long rate;
> +		struct clk *cpu_clk;
>  		int len;
>  
>  		if (cpu >= num_possible_cpus())
> @@ -117,11 +120,17 @@ static void __init parse_dt_topology(void)
>  		if (cpu_eff->compatible == NULL)
>  			continue;
>  
> -		rate = of_get_property(cn, "clock-frequency", &len);
> -		if (!rate || len != 4) {
> -			pr_err("%s missing clock-frequency property\n",
> -				cn->full_name);
> -			continue;
> +		cpu_clk = of_clk_get(cn, 0);
> +		if (IS_ERR(cpu_clk)) {
> +			prop = of_get_property(cn, "clock-frequency", &len);
> +			if (!prop || len != 4) {
> +				pr_err("%s missing clock-frequency property\n",
> +					cn->full_name);
> +				continue;
> +			}
> +			rate = be32_to_cpup(prop);
> +		} else {
> +			rate = clk_get_rate(cpu_clk);

I am not questioning whether adding a "clocks" property is proper or
not, but let me say cpu related info and parsing are already scattered
all over the place and this is wrong. We are currently trying to
consolidate CPU related info in a single structure in the kernel, and
then this code can become a consumer of that data. As to the "clocks"
property as I mentioned in another reply, that requires more thought.

Lorenzo