[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5493EA88.1080609@ti.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 11:06:16 +0200
From: Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
To: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>, <tony@...mide.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>
CC: <t-kristo@...com>, <nm@...com>, <nsekhar@...com>,
<bcousson@...libre.com>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: hwmod: Fix _wait_target_ready() for hwmods
without sysc
Lokesh,
On 19/12/14 07:21, Lokesh Vutla wrote:
> Hi Roger,
> On Thursday 18 December 2014 09:22 PM, Roger Quadros wrote:
>> Fixing up Paul's email id.
>>
>> cheers,
>> -roger
>>
>> On 18/12/14 17:49, Roger Quadros wrote:
>>> There are quite a few hwmods that don't have sysconfig register and so
>>> _find_mpu_rt_port(oh) will return NULL thus preventing ready state check
>>> on those modules after the module is enabled.
>>>
>>> This can potentially cause a bus access error if the module is accessed
>>> before the module is ready.
>>>
>>> Get rid of the redundant _find_mpu_rt_port() check from the _wait_target_ready()
>>> funcion for all the SoCs. The following PRCM register access that checks the
>>> module ready state has nothing to do with module's SYSCONFIG or mpu_rt_port.
> Yes, makes sense. This patch looks good to me.
> Tested this on AM437x-gp-evm.
>
> Tested-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@...com>
Thanks.
>
> May be good idea to warn every time if enabling of module is failed?
> Unrelated to this patch though.
Yes, failing to be ready is serious enough for a warning. Care to send a separate patch for that?
cheers,
-roger
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists