* Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> [091009 12:07]: > Tony Lindgren had written, on 10/09/2009 01:53 PM, the following: >> * Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> [091009 11:47]: >>> Tony Lindgren had written, on 10/09/2009 01:03 PM, the following: >>>> * Aguirre Rodriguez, Sergio Alberto <saaguirre@xxxxxx> [091009 08:59]: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Menon, Nishanth Sent: Friday, October 09, 2009 10:56 AM >>>>>> To: linux-omap >>>>>> Cc: Menon, Nishanth; Chikkature Rajashekar, Madhusudhan; >>>>>> Pandita, Vikram; Pais, Allen; Gadiyar, Anand; Cousson, Benoit; >>>>>> Felipe Balbi; Kevin Hilman; Premi, Sanjeev; Shilimkar, Santosh; >>>>>> Aguirre Rodriguez, Sergio Alberto; Tony Lindgren >>>>>> Subject: [PATCH v4] OMAP3: introduce OMAP3630 >>>>>> >>>>>> **--- SNIP ME -- >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> A bit of history for this patchset >>>>>> V4 - Sergio's improvement to the handling of rev decision as we just >>>>>> change the define to 3630 and remove crapy override logic in >>>>>> omap3_check_revision from v3 patch >>>>> Now looks much better ;) >>>>> >>>>>> V3 - Fixes from Sergio's comments + boot tested on SDP3430+3630. >>>>>> V2 - fixes of generic comments from Felipe Balbi+minor cleanups >>>>>> V1 - inital implementation of (a) approach >>>>>> V0 - original approach introducing a new silicon family >>>>>> **--- END OF SNIP ME -- >>>>>> Device intro: >>>>>> OMAP3630 is the latest in the family of OMAP3 devices >>>>>> and among the changes it introduces are: >>>>>> >>>>>> New OPP levels for new voltage and frequency levels. a bunch of >>>>>> Bug fixes to various modules feature additions, notably with ISP, >>>>>> sDMA etc. >>>>>> >>>>>> Details about the chip is available here: >>>>>> http://focus.ti.com/general/docs/wtbu/wtbuproductcontent.tsp?t >>>>>> emplateId=6123&navigationId=12836&contentId=52606 >>>>>> >>>>>> Strategy used: >>>>>> Strategy to introduce this device into Linux was discussed here: >>>>>> Ref: http://marc.info/?t=125343303400003&r=1&w=2 >>>>>> >>>>>> Two approaches were available: >>>>>> a) Consider 3630 generation of devices as a new family of silicon >>>>>> b) Consider 3630 as an offshoot of 3430 family of devices >>>>>> >>>>>> As a common consensus, (b) seems to be more valid for 3630 as: >>>>>> * There are changes which are easily handled by using "FEATURES" >>>>>> infrastructure. >>>>>> For details how to do this, see thread: >>>>>> http://marc.info/?t=125050998500001&r=1&w=2 >>>>>> * Most of existing 34xx infrastructure can be reused(almost 90%+) >>>>>> - so no ugly if (cpu_is_omap34xx() || cpu_is_omap36xx()) >>>>>> all over the place >>>>>> - lesser chance of bugs due to reuse of proven code flow >>>>>> - 36xx specific handling can still be done where required >>>>>> within the existing infrastructure >>>>>> >>>>>> NOTE: >>>>>> * If additional 34xx series are added, OMAP3430_REV_ESXXXX can be >>>>>> added on top of the existing 3630 ones are renumbered >>>>>> >>>>>> This patch was tested on SDP3430, boot tested on 3630 platform using >>>>>> 3430sdp defconfig >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Madhusudhan Chikkature Rajashekar <madhu.cr@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <nm@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Vikram Pandita <vikram.pandita@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Allen Pais <allen.pais@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Anand Gadiyar <gadiyar@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@xxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Sanjeev Premi <premi@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Sergio Alberto Aguirre Rodriguez <saaguirre@xxxxxx> >>>>>> Cc: Tony Lindgren <tony@xxxxxxxxxxx> >>>>> Acked-by: Sergio Aguirre <saaguirre@xxxxxx> >>>>> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++-- >>>>>> arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h | 6 ++++++ >>>>>> 2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >>>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c >>>>>> index 03b80f2..ee3bb69 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c >>>>>> @@ -210,7 +210,9 @@ void __init omap3_check_revision(void) >>>>>> hawkeye = (idcode >> 12) & 0xffff; >>>>>> rev = (idcode >> 28) & 0xff; >>>>>> - if (hawkeye == 0xb7ae) { >>>>>> + switch (hawkeye) { >>>>>> + case 0xb7ae: >>>>>> + /* Handle 34xx devices */ >>>>>> switch (rev) { >>>>>> case 0: >>>>>> omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES2_0; >>>>>> @@ -231,8 +233,26 @@ void __init omap3_check_revision(void) >>>>>> default: >>>>>> /* Use the latest known revision as default */ >>>>>> omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1; >>>>>> - rev_name = "Unknown revision\n"; >>>>>> + rev_name = "Unknown 34xx revision\n"; >>>>>> } >>>>>> + break; >>>>>> + case 0xb891: >>>>>> + /* Handle 36xx devices */ >>>>>> + switch (rev) { >>>>>> + case 0: >>>>>> + omap_revision = OMAP3630_REV_ES1_0; >>>>>> + rev_name = "ES1.0"; >>>>>> + break; >>>>>> + default: >>>>>> + /* Use the latest known revision as default */ >>>>>> + omap_revision = OMAP3630_REV_ES1_0; >>>>>> + rev_name = "Unknown 36xx revision\n"; >>>>>> + } >>>>>> + break; >>>>>> + default: >>>>>> + /* Unknown default to latest rev as default*/ >>>>>> + omap_revision = OMAP3630_REV_ES1_0; >>>>>> + rev_name = "Unknown revision\n"; >>>>>> } >>>>>> out: >>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h >>>>>> b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h >>>>>> index 431fec4..65f1882 100644 >>>>>> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h >>>>>> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h >>>>>> @@ -383,6 +383,12 @@ IS_OMAP_TYPE(3430, 0x3430) >>>>>> #define OMAP3430_REV_ES2_1 0x34302034 >>>>>> #define OMAP3430_REV_ES3_0 0x34303034 >>>>>> #define OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1 0x34304034 >>>>>> +/* NOTE: Add 36xx series below >>>>>> + * If additional 34xx series are added, OMAP3430_REV_ESXXXX can be >>>>>> + * added above the 3630 defines and series renumbered to ensure >>>>>> + * rev() > checks to work >>>>>> + */ >>>>>> +#define OMAP3630_REV_ES1_0 0x36301034 >>>> Hmm, to me it looks that this breaks cpu_is_omap34xx() for 36xx, right? >>>> >>>> How about build a kernel that boots both on 3430sdp and on some >>>> 36xx board and make sure things get detected properly by adding >>>> some debug printk statements? >>> Tested with the following patch: >>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-3430sdp.c >>> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-3430sdp.c >>> index 81aabac..2aac26d 100644 >>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-3430sdp.c >>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/board-3430sdp.c >>> @@ -498,6 +498,8 @@ static struct ehci_hcd_omap_platform_data >>> ehci_pdata __initconst = { >>> >>> static void __init omap_3430sdp_init(void) >>> { >>> + if (cpu_is_omap34xx()) >>> + printk(KERN_ERR "_______________------ 34xx detected\n"); >>> omap3430_i2c_init(); >>> platform_add_devices(sdp3430_devices, ARRAY_SIZE(sdp3430_devices)); >>> if (omap_rev() > OMAP3430_REV_ES1_0) >>> >>> >>> and yes, it prints on both 3430 and 3630 platforms (i am hacking at >>> the moment by using 3430sdpdefconfig for both platforms). >>> >>> Here is why it works: >>> arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h >>> cpu_is_omap343x() depends on is_omap34xx() depends on GET_OMAP_CLASS >>> depends on lower 8 bits of value returned by omap_rev() >>> omap_rev()(arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c) returns omap_revision. this >>> means omap_rev() will return 0x36301034 -> so class is 0x34.. >>> causing cpu_is_omap343x to be true on 3630 also. >> >> Ah, that's right, sorry for being confused. I totally forgot we're using >> the lower bits for the class.. I guess I need to start reading the code >> more :) >> >>> we might want to consider a follow on patch replacing 0x34 with 0x30 >>> and changing cpu_is_omap343x with cpu_is_omap3xxx -> at a later >>> point ofcourse. >> >> Yeah if necessary. Let's not do it right now though, we already have >> quite a pile of clean-up patches coming for the next merge window. > > so do I get an ack on v4 of the patch? ;) Yeah, will merge today. Tony -- 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
