On 8/3/2012 3:50 AM, Omar Ramirez Luna wrote: > Hi. > > On 2 August 2012 02:52, Paul Walmsley <paul@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Omar Ramirez Luna wrote: >> >>> For a reset sequence to complete cleanly, a module needs its >>> associated clocks to be enabled, otherwise the timeout check >>> in prcm code can print a false failure (failed to hardreset) >>> that occurs because the clocks aren't powered ON and the status >>> bit checked can't transition without them. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Omar Ramirez Luna <omar.luna@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> Is enabling the clocks sufficient? > > During my testing it seemed enough, besides it looks clk framework is > doing the same as _omap4_enable_module. > >> Or do we also need to enable the >> IP block, e.g. by calling >> >> if (soc_ops.enable_module) >> soc_ops.enable_module(oh); >> >> as we do on OMAP4+ in _enable() ? > > Basically this is a call to _omap4_enable_module, and the latter will > "Enable the modulemode inside CLKCTRL". > > However, _enable_clocks path which ends calling omap2_dflt_clk_enable > does the same thing with its clk->enable_reg field. > > So in _enable: > > _enable_clocks(oh); > if (soc_ops.enable_module) > soc_ops.enable_module(oh); > > The enable_module part seems redundant to me, since the module should > be already enabled by the first call to _enable_clocks. > Yes they do same thing, I believe the plan is to get rid of all clock leaf-nodes in the near future, and let hwmod handle module enable/disable part. Thanks, Vaibhav > Regards, > > Omar > -- > 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
