Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: smd-rpm: Skip proxy votes on clocks for QCM2290

[Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@oss.qualcomm.com>]

On 9/24/26 11:32 AM, Imran Shaik wrote:
> 
> 
> On 21-09-2026 02:23 pm, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>> On 9/16/26 1:05 PM, Imran Shaik wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11-09-2026 02:36 pm, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>>> On 9/10/26 3:44 PM, Imran Shaik wrote:
>>>>> clk_smd_rpm_handoff() votes both active and sleep RPM resource states for
>>>>> every clock, keeping them non-zero until a consumer takes over. If there
>>>>> is no consumer, those clocks will remain active in the idle scenario as
>>>>> well, and the sleep vote is never cleared, blocking XO shutdown.
>>>>>
>>>>> Introduce the skip_clks_handoff flag to handle this on QCM2290 clocks,
>>>>> keeping other targets unaffected.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 00f64b58874e ("clk: qcom: Add support for SMD-RPM Clocks")
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Imran Shaik <imran.shaik@oss.qualcomm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Are you booting with clk_ignore_unused?
>>>>
>>>
>>> No Konrad, clk_ignore_unused is not present.
>>>
>>> Irrespective of clk_ignore_unused, the proxy votes are placed to RPM
>>> during handoff. If no consumer takes over, those votes remain active,
>>> keeping the resource ON in idle and preventing XO shutdown.
>>
>> I re-read this and yeah you're right
>>
>> Is the handoff functionality necessary at all for non-icc clocks?
> 
> Actually, if any consumers surviving on these proxy votes on other
> targets as of today, removing the handoff logic could impact boot-up as
> well. Hence, introduced the skip_clk_handoff flag to maintain backward
> compatibility on other targets.

So is that a "no"?

Konrad