-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Op 12 mei 2008, om 18:10 heeft Tony Lindgren het volgende geschreven:
* Koen Kooi <k.kooi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [080510 02:43]:
Op 9 mei 2008, om 23:36 heeft Tony Lindgren het volgende geschreven:
* Dirk Behme <dirk.behme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> [080509 11:08]:
Tony Lindgren wrote:
http://source.mvista.com/git/?p=linux-omap-2.6.git;a=commitdiff;h=0d81cf7e804c529c58d3054c1b9bdb7b3f1dec5d
I don't know OMAP3 good enough yet, but which clock should we use
on
OMAP3 here?
It should be osc_sys_ck for 34xx.
Does it make sense to use osc_ck for OMAP3 instead of osc_sys_ck,
too?
E.g something like
...
if (cpu_is_omap2430() || cpu_is_omap34xx())
osc = clk_get(NULL, "osc_ck");
else
osc = clk_get(NULL, "osc_sys_ck");
...
There's no osc_ck in clock34xx.h.
Does this patch make sense for omap3?
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm.c
@@ -779,7 +779,11 @@ int __init omap2_pm_init(void)
l = __raw_readl(OMAP24XX_PRCM_REVISION);
printk(KERN_INFO "PRCM revision %d.%d\n", (l >> 4) & 0x0f, l
& 0x0f);
- osc_ck = clk_get(NULL, "osc_ck");
+ if (cpu_is_omap2430() )
+ osc_ck = clk_get(NULL, "osc_ck");
+ else
+ osc_ck = clk_get(NULL, "osc_sys_ck");
+
if (IS_ERR(osc_ck)) {
printk(KERN_ERR "could not get osc_ck\n");
return -ENODEV;
Well it make sense, but does not alone help much. I think there will
be some 34xx PM patches hitting the list soonish.
It actually makes my beagleboard freeze right after printing "PRCM
revision", so I suspect more is needed. I'm eagerly awaiting the PM
patches :)
regards,
Koen
Tony
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFIKG2RMkyGM64RGpERAphOAJ4rZhFUsv/lX7Nq5dkZoDmtzEveFgCfc2oU
OlrtbS1JBNIyIZDhTViahgw=
=9jvA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
