On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 12:43:40PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 03/12/15 10:20, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2015-02-17 14:01:04 [-0800], Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >> diff =
> >> --- arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c
> >> +++ /tmp/cocci-output-11792-b62223-mach-imx6q.c
> >> @@ -211,7 +211,6 @@ static void __init imx6q_1588_init(void)
> >> * set bit IOMUXC_GPR1[21]. Or the PTP clock must be from pad
> >> * (external OSC), and we need to clear the bit.
> >> */
> >> - clksel = ptp_clk == enet_ref ? IMX6Q_GPR1_ENET_CLK_SEL_ANATOP :
> >> IMX6Q_GPR1_ENET_CLK_SEL_PAD;
> >> gpr = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_compatible("fsl,imx6q-iomuxc-gpr");
> >> if (!IS_ERR(gpr))
> > Any idea how to do the comparison here? Or should we rely that the bootloader
> > sets this properly (it managed already to select a frequency)? The phy has no
> > clock node in current DT's so we can check this.
> >
>
> This has been fixed by adding a clk_is_match() helper and using that to
> compare instead of comparing raw pointers. It would be nice if we could
> replace the patch with something else that doesn't require this helper
> though. It looks like this is static board configuration, so I wonder
> why we didn't just have a DT property that indicates how the gpr should
> be configured for this particular board.
We did not add a DT property for it, because there was already enough
info (clock configuration) in DT for kernel to figure it out.
Shawn
--
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
