On 13/09/13 14:34, Kristo, Tero wrote: > On 09/13/2013 10:51 AM, Stefan Roese wrote: >> On 11.09.2013 09:21, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: >>> On 10/09/13 16:17, Tero Kristo wrote: >>> >>>> In theory, DPLLs can also be used in their bypass mode to feed customer >>>> nodes clocks. I just think the check in the clkoutx2_recalc is wrong, >>>> and should be enhanced to actually check what is the target mode for the >>>> clock once it is enabled. Maybe something like this would work properly: >>>> >>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/dpll3xxx.c >>>> b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/dpll3xxx.c >>>> index 3a0296c..ba218fb 100644 >>>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/dpll3xxx.c >>>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/dpll3xxx.c >>>> @@ -658,14 +658,12 @@ unsigned long omap3_clkoutx2_recalc(struct clk_hw >>>> *hw, >>>> >>>> dd = pclk->dpll_data; >>>> >>>> - WARN_ON(!dd->enable_mask); >>>> - >>>> - v = __raw_readl(dd->control_reg) & dd->enable_mask; >>>> - v >>= __ffs(dd->enable_mask); >>>> - if ((v != OMAP3XXX_EN_DPLL_LOCKED) || (dd->flags & DPLL_J_TYPE)) >>>> + if ((dd->flags & DPLL_J_TYPE) || >>>> + __clk_get_rate(dd->clk_bypass) == __clk_get_rate(pclk)) >>>> rate = parent_rate; >>>> else >>>> rate = parent_rate * 2; >>>> + >>>> return rate; >>>> } >>> >>> Stefan, are you able to test the above? >>> >>> I'd rather have a proper fix for this, than hack omapdss =). >> >> Okay, I finally found some time to test this. The patch above generates >> this warning: >> >> arch/arm/mach-omap2/dpll3xxx.c: In function 'omap3_clkoutx2_recalc': >> arch/arm/mach-omap2/dpll3xxx.c:663:6: warning: passing argument 1 of '__clk_get_rate' from incompatible pointer type [enabled by default] >> include/linux/clk-provider.h:423:15: note: expected 'struct clk *' but argument is of type 'struct clk_hw_omap *' > > Yea sorry about that, I just quickly hacked the patch together without > testing it at all. :P > >> >> I then changed it (not 100% sure if correctly) to this version: >> >> + if ((dd->flags & DPLL_J_TYPE) || >> + __clk_get_rate(dd->clk_bypass) == __clk_get_rate(pclk->hw.clk)) >> >> And this seems to work. At least the clock rate mismatch warning does not >> appear with this patch applied (and without the clk_enable) in the >> bootlog any more. > > Yea, looks good to me, however I guess I would like second opinion on > this also. Tero, can you queue this patch? Or who should handle this? Tomi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
