Vishwanath Sripathy wrote, on 02/19/2011 06:52 PM:
-----Original Message----- From: linux-omap-owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linux-omap- owner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nishanth Menon Sent: Saturday, February 19, 2011 5:32 PM To: linux-omap Cc: Tony Lindgren; Kevin Hilman; Nishanth Menon Subject: [PATCH 02/19] omap3630: hwmod: sr: enable for higher ES Enable hwmod entries for OMAP3630 for higher ES revisions as well. This is to ensure that SR can be used in all revisions of OMAP3630 as of this posting. Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon<nm@xxxxxx> --- arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_3xxx_data.c | 8 ++++++-- 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_3xxx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_3xxx_data.c index ea1f49a..bbcbea6 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_3xxx_data.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_3xxx_data.c @@ -1318,7 +1318,9 @@ static struct omap_hwmod omap36xx_sr1_hwmod = { }, .slaves = omap3_sr1_slaves, .slaves_cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(omap3_sr1_slaves), - .omap_chip = OMAP_CHIP_INIT(CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1), + .omap_chip = OMAP_CHIP_INIT(CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1 | + CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1_1 | + CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1_2),What's the need of this? Here is the code snippet from id.c -----snip----- case 0xb891: /* Handle 36xx devices */ omap_chip.oc |= CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1; switch(rev) { case 0: /* Take care of early samples */ omap_revision = OMAP3630_REV_ES1_0; break; case 1: omap_revision = OMAP3630_REV_ES1_1; omap_chip.oc |= CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1_1; break; case 2: default: omap_revision = OMAP3630_REV_ES1_2; omap_chip.oc |= CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1_2; } So it's clear that omap_chip.oc will have CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1 anyway on all ES versions.
Hmm... thanks for picking this up, but this is inconsistent and confusing implementation in id.c. So the way CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1 behaves is entirely different from CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1_1 or CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1_2 or any of the OMAP3430ES* which will only be set for the specific rev of the silicon.
I can post a patch later on to replace CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1 with CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES_ALL which allows the code to be readable and make CHIP_IS_OMAP3630ES1 mean precisely what it should have meant like the rest of the ESs - only for ES1.0.
What do people think of this? -- Regards, Nishanth Menon -- 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
