[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1209112218440.9444@utopia.booyaka.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2012 22:28:22 +0000 (UTC)
From: Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>
To: Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>, b-cousson@...com
cc: balbi@...com, tony@...mide.com, linux@....linux.org.uk,
arnd@...db.de, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm: omap: hwmod: make *phy_48m* as the main_clk of
ocp2scp
Hi Kishon, BenoƮt,
On Fri, 7 Sep 2012, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
> Made *ocp2scp_usb_phy_phy_48m* as the main_clk for ocp2scp. Since this
> ocp2scp module does not have any fck but does have a single opt_clock,
> it is added as the main_clk for ocp2scp. Also removed phy_48m as the
> optional clock since it is now made as the main clock. By this the
> driver need not enable/disable phy_48m clk separately and
> runtime_get/runtime_put will take care of that.
Looking at this patch, it doesn't seem to make sense from a hardware point
of view. If you look at the OMAP4430 TRM Rev. AE, Table 23-1166 "Clocks
and Resets", the 48MHz clock input is listed as an "Optional functional
clock". The main functional clock is listed as "INIT_960M_FCLK", which
according to the same TRM, Section 3.6.3.9.1 "Overview", is an alias for
the clock we call "dpll_usb_clkdcoldo_ck".
So if any clock should be the main functional clock in the hwmod data,
shouldn't it be dpll_usb_clkdcoldo_ck? The goal with the hwmod data
is/was to have it match the hardware.
...
More to the point, I guess I don't see what the problem is with
adding a few lines to the ocp2scp driver to control the "phy_48m" optional
clock via the clock framework. Is there some reason why you
couldn't prepare & enable it after the pm_runtime_get_*(),
and disable and unprepare it before the pm_runtime_put_*() ?
- Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists