On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 3:42 PM, Leo Yan <leo.yan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 04, 2016 at 01:21:00PM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
>> This is not about enabling/disabling the clock(s) to the timer.
>> It doesn't matter if these clocks are always on.
>>
>> It is about determining the *frequency* of the timers.
>>
>> It is vital that the timer driver get the right frequency of the clock
>> to the block from the clock implementation, and I do not think
>> it is the same as the "apb_pclk".
>
> Thanks for reminding. Fortunately, apb_pclk and timer's clock are
> same, all of them's rate are 19.2MHz.
OK I was wrong, worrying about nothing.
>> The thing is that of course "any frequency" will
>> work but what you will notice is that the timer runs very
>> weirdly compared to wall-clock time unless the right clock
>> yielding the right frequency has been specified here.
>
> Compared sp804 timer counter with wall-clock (which is using ARM's
> arch timer), and confirmed that sp804 timer's counter register is
> decreasing with rate 19.2MHz.
Thanks, awesome.
> Also have checked Hi6220's spec, there have no timer's dediated clock
> enabling bits. This is the reason before I only registered one clock.
> So according to you and Rob's comments, how about change as below?
>
> dual_timer0: timer@f8008000 {
> compatible = "arm,sp804", "arm,primecell";
> reg = <0x0 0xf8008000 0x0 0x1000>;
> interrupts = <GIC_SPI 14 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
> <GIC_SPI 15 IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
> clocks = <&ao_ctrl HI6220_TIMER0_PCLK>,
> <&ao_ctrl HI6220_TIMER0_PCLK>,
> <&ao_ctrl HI6220_TIMER0_PCLK>;
> clock-names = "apb_pclk", "apb_pclk", "apb_pclk";
This works for me, though I think only the last name
matters so I would name the first two "timer1" and "timer2".
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
