Am Samstag, den 08.06.2013, 15:21 +0200 schrieb Sascha Hauer:
> On Thu, Jun 06, 2013 at 08:40:46AM -0500, menon.nishanth@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 7:47 AM, Jan Weitzel <j.weitzel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > +noinline int omap4460_scale_vcores(unsigned vsel0_pin, unsigned volt_mv)
> > > +{
> > > + void __iomem *base;
> > > + u32 val = 0;
> > > +
> > > + /* For VC bypass only VCOREx_CGF_FORCE is necessary and
> > > + * VCOREx_CFG_VOLTAGE changes can be discarded
> > > + */
> > > + writel(0, OMAP44XX_PRM_VC_CFG_I2C_MODE);
> > > + writel(0x6026, OMAP44XX_PRM_VC_CFG_I2C_CLK);
> > > +
> > > + /* TPS - supplies vdd_mpu on 4460
> > > + * Setup SET1 and SET0 with right values so that kernel
> > > + * can use either of them based on its needs.
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > + omap4_do_scale_tps62361(TPS62361_REG_ADDR_SET0, volt_mv);
> > Just a nitpick - the general rule of TPS+OMAP4460 integration is *NOT*
> > to program SET0 register. this is intended to be at boot voltage
> > required to be used when reboot due to s/w controlled or h/w watchdog.
>
> So this line should simply be removed?
>
> Ok, this line is only moved and not introduced in this patch, so it
> should be fine to apply this patch and leave this for a separate patch.
I create a separate patch. I had the problem that our gpio module
(gpio6) goes low due to a reset at init time. Must fix this in kernel.
Jan
>
> Sascha
>
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
