On 12 April 2016 at 00:11, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 04/11, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> + Adrian >> >> On 5 April 2016 at 09:46, Sreedhar Sambangi <ssambang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > The DLL clock has to be enabled until the correct >> > clock frequency is delivered to DLL >> > '1'(default) - DLL clock is disabled >> > '0' - dll clock has legacly clock enable. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Varadarajan Narayanan <varada@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > Signed-off-by: Sreedhar Sambangi <ssambang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Adrian Hunter is the maintainer for sdhci, next time make sure to post to him. >> >> As this seems like fairly trivial change I decided to pick it up >> anyway. So applied for next! >> >> Note, that I changed the prefix of the commit message header to "mmc". >> > > I'm not sure this patch is actually right. In the downstream > sources we do quite a few more reads and writes if we need to > poke this second DLL configuration register. Furthermore, on > msm8974 and apq8084 this register doesn't even exist so writing > to it may cause problems if it isn't write ignored (I haven't > checked). > > I think we should follow the downstream kernel design instead. > Namely, reading the major/minor version registers to figure out > if we should be touching this register in the first place, and > then adding a clock property to the DT binding for the XO source > so we can determine the XO frequency. It seems that we need this > frequency to figure out how to program the second DLL > configuration register appropriately. Stephen, Thanks for reviewing. I have dropped this patch for now. Kind regards Uffe -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
