On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 02:11:50AM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Dec 2010, G, Manjunath Kondaiah wrote:
>
> > Add OMAP2430 DMA hwmod data and also add required
> > DMA device attributes.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: G, Manjunath Kondaiah <manjugk@xxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_2430_data.c | 87 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/dma.h | 1 +
> > 2 files changed, 88 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_2430_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_2430_data.c
> > index f68409e..b52ba66 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_2430_data.c
> > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_2430_data.c
> > @@ -43,6 +43,7 @@ static struct omap_hwmod omap2430_gpio2_hwmod;
> > static struct omap_hwmod omap2430_gpio3_hwmod;
> > static struct omap_hwmod omap2430_gpio4_hwmod;
> > static struct omap_hwmod omap2430_gpio5_hwmod;
> > +static struct omap_hwmod omap2430_dma_system_hwmod;
> >
> > /* L3 -> L4_CORE interface */
> > static struct omap_hwmod_ocp_if omap2430_l3_main__l4_core = {
> > @@ -840,6 +841,89 @@ static struct omap_hwmod omap2430_gpio5_hwmod = {
> > .omap_chip = OMAP_CHIP_INIT(CHIP_IS_OMAP2430),
> > };
> >
> > +/* dma_system */
> > +static struct omap_hwmod_class_sysconfig omap2430_dma_sysc = {
> > + .rev_offs = 0x0000,
> > + .sysc_offs = 0x002c,
> > + .syss_offs = 0x0028,
> > + .sysc_flags = (SYSC_HAS_SIDLEMODE | SYSC_HAS_SOFTRESET |
>
> The OMAP2430 TRM Silicon Rev. 2.1 [Rev. Z] [SWPU090Z] Table 9-25
> 'DMA4_OCP_SYSCONFIG' does not list a SIDLEMODE register bitfield for this
> IP block. Is there a reason why you list one?
>
> > + SYSC_HAS_MIDLEMODE | SYSC_HAS_CLOCKACTIVITY |
> > + SYSC_HAS_EMUFREE | SYSC_HAS_AUTOIDLE),
> > + .idlemodes = (SIDLE_FORCE | SIDLE_NO | SIDLE_SMART |
>
> If there is no SIDLEMODE register bitfield, then none of these SIDLE_*
> modes should be included.
I'm confused. I thought the whole point of hwmod was that the data for
it was generated from a TI database of how the chip is actually setup.
However, from all the patching which seems to be going on, it looks to
me like that's not the case - and if that's true, hwmod was mis-sold.
It's just moved the problem rather than solving anything.
What's going on?
--
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
