Hi Govindraj, Tero,
another question about this patch:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> index 207a2ff..ec19841 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> @@ -381,6 +381,43 @@ static int _set_module_autoidle(struct omap_hwmod *oh, u8 autoidle,
> }
>
> /**
> + * _set_ioring_wakeup - enable/disable IO pad wakeup flag for dynamic muxing
> + * @oh: struct omap_hwmod *
> + * @set_wake: bool value indicating to set (true) or clear (false) wakeup enable
> + *
> + * Set or clear the I/O pad wakeup flag in the dynamic mux entries for
> + * the hwmod @oh. This function does not change anything in the
> + * hardware. Rather, the @oh->mux->pads_dynamic array is changed, and
> + * these settings are later written to the SCM PADCTRL registers when
> + * the hwmod is enabled or idled. No return value.
> + *
> + * XXX Shouldn't the dynamic pad changes affect hwmod shutdown as
> + * well?
> + * XXX Shouldn't this function update the hardware SCM PADCONF registers if
> + * anything has changed?
> + */
> +static void _set_ioring_wakeup(struct omap_hwmod *oh, bool set_wake)
> +{
> + struct omap_device_pad *pad;
> + int j;
> +
> + if (!oh->mux || !oh->mux->enabled)
> + return;
> +
> + for (j = 0; j < oh->mux->nr_pads_dynamic; j++) {
> + pad = oh->mux->pads_dynamic[j];
> +
> + if (!(pad->flags & OMAP_DEVICE_PAD_WAKEUP))
> + continue;
> +
> + if (set_wake)
> + pad->idle |= OMAP_WAKEUP_EN;
> + else
> + pad->idle &= ~OMAP_WAKEUP_EN;
> + }
> +}
It appears that this loop only affects dynamic mux entries. Should it
also affect static mux entries?
- Paul
--
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
