On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 07:13:16PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c
> index c4b80a4..55c5d67 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
> #include <mach/clock.h>
> #include <mach/clockdomain.h>
> #include <mach/cpu.h>
> +#include <mach/prcm.h>
> #include <asm/div64.h>
>
> #include "memory.h"
> @@ -247,9 +248,9 @@ static void omap2_clk_wait_ready(struct clk *clk)
> /* REVISIT: What are the appropriate exclusions for 34XX? */
> /* OMAP3: ignore DSS-mod clocks */
> if (cpu_is_omap34xx() &&
> - (((u32)reg & ~0xff) == (u32)OMAP_CM_REGADDR(OMAP3430_DSS_MOD, 0) ||
> - ((((u32)reg & ~0xff) == (u32)OMAP_CM_REGADDR(CORE_MOD, 0)) &&
> - clk->enable_bit == OMAP3430_EN_SSI_SHIFT)))
> + (((u32)reg & ~0xff) == cm_read_mod_reg(OMAP3430_DSS_MOD, 0) ||
> + ((((u32)reg & ~0xff) == cm_read_mod_reg(CORE_MOD, 0)) &&
> + clk->enable_bit == OMAP3430_EN_SSI_SHIFT)))
> return;
As suggested in patch 2, I hate this approach. It's far better to deal
with this by changing the way we handle enabling and disabling clocks,
hence my
"[ARM] omap: eliminate unnecessary conditionals in omap2_clk_wait_ready"
> @@ -476,6 +466,37 @@ static int __init omap2_clk_arch_init(void)
> }
> arch_initcall(omap2_clk_arch_init);
>
> +static u32 prm_base;
> +static u32 cm_base;
> +
> +/*
> + * Since we share clock data for 242x and 243x, we need to rewrite some
> + * some register base offsets. Assume offset is at prm_base if flagged,
> + * else assume it's cm_base.
> + */
> +static inline void omap2_clk_check_reg(u32 flags, void __iomem **reg)
> +{
> + u32 tmp = (__force u32)*reg;
> +
> + if ((tmp >> 24) != 0)
> + return;
> +
> + if (flags & OFFSET_GR_MOD)
> + tmp += prm_base;
> + else
> + tmp += cm_base;
> +
> + *reg = (__force void __iomem *)tmp;
> +}
> +
> +void __init omap2_clk_rewrite_base(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> + omap2_clk_check_reg(clk->flags, &clk->clksel_reg);
> + omap2_clk_check_reg(clk->flags, &clk->enable_reg);
> + if (clk->dpll_data)
> + omap2_clk_check_reg(0, &clk->dpll_data->mult_div1_reg);
> +}
> +
> int __init omap2_clk_init(void)
> {
> struct prcm_config *prcm;
> @@ -487,6 +508,12 @@ int __init omap2_clk_init(void)
> else if (cpu_is_omap2430())
> cpu_mask = RATE_IN_243X;
>
> + for (clkp = onchip_24xx_clks;
> + clkp < onchip_24xx_clks + ARRAY_SIZE(onchip_24xx_clks);
> + clkp++) {
> + omap2_clk_rewrite_base(*clkp);
> + }
> +
I'm afraid this also fails to satisfy my decency filter. Let's summarise
what's going on here.
- the structure initializers are setup to cast integer register offsets
to void __iomem *.
- the code above walks all clock structures, looking for what could be
considered an offset (iow, bits 31-24 of the pointer being zero).
- it looks at the OFFSET_GR_MOD flag to determine which base to add in
- the base address is not 'void __iomem *' but 'u32'.
- we update the void __iomem * pointers in the structure.
So, we have a base address which is an integer, and an offset which is
an void __iomem *.
I can see why you want to do this, but I think it needs more thought.
I'll sit on this patch for a while.
In the mean time, I've fixed up patches 1-8,10 to apply on top of my
patch set.
However, still waiting for a few to come through: D6, E2 and F2. No,
these aren't suck in any of my mail spools or list admin queues.
--
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
