hi,
Sebastian Reichel <sre@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 13, 2015 at 10:50:45AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>> Rolf Peukert <rolf.peukert@xxxxxxx> writes:
>> > On 13.10.2015 10:15, Tero Kristo wrote:
>> >> On 10/12/2015 06:22 PM, Rolf Peukert wrote:
>> >>> The glue code in drivers/usb/musb/am35x.c calls clk_get() to get its
>> >>> interface and function clocks for the M-USB controller. These calls fail
>> >>> in the current kernel. This patch adds clock definitions containing the
>> >>> device ID to the list in clk-3xxx.c, so the calls to clk_get() in
>> >>> am35x.c can succeed.
>> >>>
>> >>> Signed-off-by: Rolf Peukert <rolf.peukert@xxxxxxx>
>> >>>
>> >>> ---
>> >>> drivers/clk/ti/clk-3xxx.c | 2 ++
>> >>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>> >>>
>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/ti/clk-3xxx.c b/drivers/clk/ti/clk-3xxx.c
>> >>> index 8831e1a..b635deb 100644
>> >>> --- a/drivers/clk/ti/clk-3xxx.c
>> >>> +++ b/drivers/clk/ti/clk-3xxx.c
>> >>> @@ -507,7 +507,9 @@ static struct ti_dt_clk am35xx_clks[] = {
>> >>> DT_CLK("davinci_mdio.0", NULL, "emac_fck"),
>> >>> DT_CLK("vpfe-capture", "master", "vpfe_ick"),
>> >>> DT_CLK("vpfe-capture", "slave", "vpfe_fck"),
>> >>> + DT_CLK("5c040000.am35x_otg_hs", "ick", "hsotgusb_ick_am35xx"),
>> >>> DT_CLK(NULL, "hsotgusb_ick", "hsotgusb_ick_am35xx"),
>> >>> + DT_CLK("5c040000.am35x_otg_hs", "fck", "hsotgusb_fck_am35xx"),
>> >>> DT_CLK(NULL, "hsotgusb_fck", "hsotgusb_fck_am35xx"),
>> >>> DT_CLK(NULL, "hecc_ck", "hecc_ck"),
>> >>> DT_CLK(NULL, "uart4_ick", "uart4_ick_am35xx"),
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >> Adding clock aliases should be avoided, isn't there any other way to fix
>> >> this issue? Like adding clocks = <&xyz> references under the DT node?
>> >>
>> >> -Tero
>> >>
>> >
>> > Yes, I just tried adding the lines
>> >
>> > clocks = <&hsotgusb_ick_am35xx>, <&hsotgusb_fck_am35xx>;
>> > clock-names = "ick", "fck";
>> >
>> > to am3517.dtsi and this works too. But wouldn't this mean the driver
>> > will not work anymore in kernels without DT support?
>>
>> I have this doubt myself. This will break on non-DT boots and,
>> while we're trying to move to DT-only, IMO meanwhile we should
>> allow for fixes to DT and non-DT world. Once the conversion is
>> done, fine.
>
> Isn't am35xx already DT-only? The remaining omap2+ boards are both
> omap3430 based:
yeah, and this system is omap3 based, not am335x based ;-)
--
balbi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
