> -----Original Message----- > From: Menon, Nishanth > Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 9:55 PM > To: Lohithakshan, Ranjith; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: Lohithakshan, Ranjith > Subject: RE: [PATCH] AM35xx: Clock table updates for AM3505/17 > > > From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-omap- > > owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ranjith Lohithakshan > > Sent: Thursday, November 05, 2009 2:39 AM > [...] > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock34xx.c b/arch/arm/mach- > > omap2/clock34xx.c > > index c258f87..9ac5c0e 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock34xx.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock34xx.c > > @@ -93,140 +93,143 @@ struct omap_clk { > > #define CK_343X (1 << 0) > > #define CK_3430ES1 (1 << 1) > > #define CK_3430ES2 (1 << 2) > > +#define CK_3517 (1 << 3) > > +#define CK_3505 (1 << 4) > > +#define CK_35XX (CK_3517 | CK_3505) > > > > static struct omap_clk omap34xx_clks[] = { > > - CLK(NULL, "omap_32k_fck", &omap_32k_fck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "virt_12m_ck", &virt_12m_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "virt_13m_ck", &virt_13m_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "virt_16_8m_ck", &virt_16_8m_ck, CK_3430ES2), > > - CLK(NULL, "virt_19_2m_ck", &virt_19_2m_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "virt_26m_ck", &virt_26m_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "virt_38_4m_ck", &virt_38_4m_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "osc_sys_ck", &osc_sys_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "sys_ck", &sys_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "sys_altclk", &sys_altclk, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "mcbsp_clks", &mcbsp_clks, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "sys_clkout1", &sys_clkout1, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "dpll1_ck", &dpll1_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "dpll1_x2_ck", &dpll1_x2_ck, CK_343X), > > - CLK(NULL, "dpll1_x2m2_ck", &dpll1_x2m2_ck, CK_343X), > > + CLK(NULL, "omap_32k_fck", &omap_32k_fck, CK_343X | CK_35XX), > > + CLK(NULL, "virt_12m_ck", &virt_12m_ck, CK_343X | CK_35XX), > > + CLK(NULL, "virt_13m_ck", &virt_13m_ck, CK_343X | CK_35XX), > > + CLK(NULL, "virt_16_8m_ck", &virt_16_8m_ck, CK_3430ES2 | CK_35XX), > > + CLK(NULL, "virt_19_2m_ck", &virt_19_2m_ck, CK_343X | CK_35XX), > > + CLK(NULL, "virt_26m_ck", &virt_26m_ck, CK_343X | CK_35XX), > [...] > Could we have CK_3XXX? I mean this would probably happen when 36/37xx gets > introduced also.. does that make sense? > Yes, it would help to have a CK_3XXX defined to cover all common OMAP3 clocks. The tables would look simpler going forward. Paul, what do you think? -- 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
