On 08/11/2011 01:55 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:54:09PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
>>>> you need some other way to handle this. Why do you need to manually set
>>>> the rate rather than having hwmod handle this for you ?
>>>>
>>>> your argument that "it's a one time setting" is not enough to have this
>>>> in the driver. Drivers should not care about clocks anymore, this should
>>>> have been done on another layer.
>>>
>>> Hwmod will have no idea on the rate required.
>>
>> does the rate need to change ? Also, I have not mentioned hwmod anytime
>
> i did mention hwmod, nevermind that part. Still I'm not sure where is
> the right place to handle this.
>
Aren't the omap_device_pm_latency callbacks the right place to do it?
e.g. in the following snippet from mach-omap2/temp_sensor_device.c
+static struct omap_device_pm_latency omap_temp_sensor_latency[] = {
+ {
+ .deactivate_func = omap_device_idle_hwmods,
+ .activate_func = omap_device_enable_hwmods,
+ .flags = OMAP_DEVICE_LATENCY_AUTO_ADJUST,
+ }
+};
instead of directly pointing activate_func to omap_device_enable_hwmods,
it could point to a function that sets the required clock rate and then
enables the hwmod.
regards,
-roger
--
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
