On 09/12/2013 12:21 AM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: > On 09/11/2013 09:56 PM, Stephen Warren wrote: >> On 08/27/2013 03:28 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote: >>> From: Stephen Warren <swarren@xxxxxxxxxx> >>> >>> Tegra's board file currently initializes clocks much earlier than those >>> for most other ARM SoCs. The reason is: >>> >>> * The PMC HW block is involved in the path of some interrupts (i.e. it >>> inverts, or not, the IRQ input pin dedicated to the PMIC). >>> >>> * So, that part of the PMC must be initialized early so that the IRQ >>> polarity is correct. >>> >>> * The PMC initialization is currently monolithic, and the PMC has some >>> clock inputs, so the init routine ends up calling of_clk_get_by_name(), >>> and hence clocks must be set up early too. >>> >>> In order to defer clock initialization to the more typical location, >>> split out the portions of tegra_pmc_init() that are truly IRQ-related >>> into a separate tegra_pmc_init_irq(), which can be called from the >>> machine descriptor's .init_irq() function, and defer the rest until >>> the machine descriptor's .init_machine() function. With arch/arm calling >>> of_clk_init(NULL) from time_init() this also allows the removal of >>> .init_time() hook. >> >> Sebastian, I assume you're targeting v3.13 or later for this patch >> series? If so, it might be a good idea if I apply this patch myself to >> the Tegra tree so that I can base any future Tegra patches on top of it >> to avoid any possible conflicts. I can put this patch first in the >> cleanup branch so you can merge it into whatever tree you use for the >> rest of this series. Does that work for you? If so, let me know. Thanks. > > Yes, I was waiting for v3.12-rc1 to drop to have something stable with > the new machs inside. I haven't made up my mind who will finally take > the patches but I guess it's either arm-soc or each individual > maintainer. OK, I'll take this one patch through the Tegra tree, making sure it's first and based on v3.12-rc1, and I'll create a tag for you to pull into your branch as needed. > Currently, the patch set includes your original patch and another one to > remove .init_time when the arch-wide default callback is available. If > you want to take it now, I can add the corresponding dependency to the > cover letter and drop the patch from my set. Sounds good. From memory, that second patch you mentioned can go through any tree you want; I don't think it will cause any conflicts since it's tiny. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
