> -----Original Message----- > From: Gopinath, Thara > Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 8:56 PM > To: Varadarajan, Charulatha; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Cc: paul@xxxxxxxxx; khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Cousson, Benoit; Sripathy, > Vishwanath; Sawant, Anand > Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 3/9] OMAP3: PM: Adding smartreflex device file. > > > > >>-----Original Message----- > >>From: Varadarajan, Charulatha > >>Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 11:09 AM > >>To: Gopinath, Thara; linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>Cc: paul@xxxxxxxxx; khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Cousson, Benoit; > Sripathy, > >>Vishwanath; Sawant, Anand > >>Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 3/9] OMAP3: PM: Adding smartreflex device file. > >> > >>Thara, > >> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> [mailto:linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gopinath, Thara > >>> Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2010 9:41 PM > >>> To: linux-omap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > >>> Cc: paul@xxxxxxxxx; khilman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Cousson, > >>> Benoit; Sripathy, Vishwanath; Sawant, Anand; Gopinath, Thara > >>> Subject: [PATCH v4 3/9] OMAP3: PM: Adding smartreflex device file. > >>> > >>> This patch adds support for device registration of various > >>> smartreflex module present in the system. This patch introduces > >>> the platform data for smartreflex devices which include > >>> the efused and test n-target vaules, module enable/disable > >>> pointers and a parameter to indicate whether smartreflex > >>> autocompensation needs to be enabled on init or not. > >>> Currently auocompensation is enabled on init by default > >>> for OMAP3430 ES3.1 chip. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Thara Gopinath <thara@xxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/Makefile | 2 +- > >>> arch/arm/mach-omap2/sr_device.c | 177 > >>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 2 files changed, 178 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > >>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-omap2/sr_device.c > >>> > >> > >><<snip>> > >> > >>> + > >>> +static int sr_dev_init(struct omap_hwmod *oh, void *user) > >> > >>Since *user is unused, you may rename it to *unused > > Ok will do. > > >> > >>> +{ > >>> + struct omap_sr_data *sr_data; > >>> + struct omap_sr_dev_data *sr_dev_data; > >>> + struct omap_device *od; > >>> + char *name = "smartreflex"; > >>> + static int i; > >>> + > >>> + sr_data = kzalloc(sizeof(struct omap_sr_data), GFP_KERNEL); > >>> + if (!sr_data) { > >>> + pr_err("%s: Unable to allocate memory for %s > >>> sr_data.Error!\n", > >>> + __func__, oh->name); > >>> + return -ENOMEM; > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> + sr_dev_data = (struct omap_sr_dev_data *)oh->dev_attr; > >>> + if (unlikely(!sr_dev_data)) { > >>> + pr_err("%s: dev atrribute is NULL\n", __func__); > >>> + goto exit; > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> + /* > >>> + * OMAP3430 ES3.1 chips by default come with Efuse burnt > >>> + * with parameters required for full functionality of > >>> + * smartreflex AVS feature like ntarget values , sennenable > >>> + * and senpenable. So enable the SR AVS feature during boot up > >>> + * itself if it is a OMAP3430 ES3.1 chip. > >>> + */ > >>> + sr_data->enable_on_init = false; > >>> + if (cpu_is_omap343x()) > >>> + if (omap_rev() == OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1) > >>> + sr_data->enable_on_init = true; > >>> + > >>> + sr_data->voltdm = > >>> omap_voltage_domain_lookup(sr_dev_data->vdd_name); > >>> + if (IS_ERR(sr_data->voltdm)) { > >>> + pr_err("%s: Unable to get voltage domain > >>> pointer for VDD %s\n", > >>> + __func__, sr_dev_data->vdd_name); > >>> + goto exit; > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> + sr_dev_data->volts_supported = omap_voltage_get_volttable( > >>> + sr_data->voltdm, &sr_dev_data->volt_data); > >>> + if (!sr_dev_data->volts_supported) { > >>> + pr_warning("%s: No Voltage table registerd fo VDD%d." > >>> + "Something really wrong\n\n", __func__, i + 1); > >>> + goto exit; > >>> + } > >>> + > >>> + sr_set_nvalues(sr_dev_data, sr_data); > >>> + > >>> + od = omap_device_build(name, i, oh, sr_data, sizeof(*sr_data), > >>> + omap_sr_latency, > >>> + ARRAY_SIZE(omap_sr_latency), 0); > >> > >>Patch 4 should come before patch 3 in the series. Otherwise, this > >>would fail during a git-bisect. > > Why?? All patches individually compile and boot. Oh data for SR is filled only in patch 4 but oh is being used here. Wouldn't that create a problem? > > >> > >>> + if (IS_ERR(od)) > >>> + pr_warning("%s: Could not build omap_device for > >>> %s: %s.\n\n", > >>> + __func__, name, oh->name); > >> > >>Return error. > >> > >>> +exit: > >>> + i++; > >>> + kfree(sr_data); > >>> + return 0; > >>> +} > >>> + > >>> +static int __init omap_devinit_smartreflex(void) > >>> +{ > >>> + return omap_hwmod_for_each_by_class("smartreflex", > >>> sr_dev_init, NULL); > >>> +} > >>> +device_initcall(omap_devinit_smartreflex); > >>> -- > >>> 1.7.0.4 > >>> > >>> -- > >>> 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 > >>> -- 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
