On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 15:47:58, Balbi, Felipe wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 09:48:20AM +0000, Hiremath, Vaibhav wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 15:09:24, Balbi, Felipe wrote:
> > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 05:58:00PM +0000, Hiremath, Vaibhav wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 04:25:30, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > * Vaibhav Hiremath <hvaib...@ti.com> [120119 06:01]:
> > > > > > OMAP device has 32k-sync timer which is currently used as a
> > > > > > clocksource in the kernel (omap2plus_defconfig).
> > > > > > The current implementation uses compile time selection between
> > > > > > gp-timer and 32k-sync timer, which breaks multi-omap build for
> > > > > > the devices like AM33xx, where 32k-sync timer is not available.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So use hwmod database lookup mechanism, through which at run-time
> > > > > > we can identify availability of 32k-sync timer on the device,
> > > > > > else fall back to gp-timer.
> > > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > > --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/counter_32k.c
> > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/counter_32k.c
> > > > > > @@ -69,52 +69,55 @@ void read_persistent_clock(struct timespec *ts)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > int __init omap_init_clocksource_32k(void)
> > > > > > {
> > > > > > - static char err[] __initdata = KERN_ERR
> > > > > > - "%s: can't register clocksource!\n";
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > - if (cpu_is_omap16xx() || cpu_class_is_omap2()) {
> > > > > > - u32 pbase;
> > > > > > - unsigned long size = SZ_4K;
> > > > > > - void __iomem *base;
> > > > > > - struct clk *sync_32k_ick;
> > > > > > -
> > > > > > - if (cpu_is_omap16xx()) {
> > > > > > - pbase = OMAP16XX_TIMER_32K_SYNCHRONIZED;
> > > > > > - size = SZ_1K;
> > > > > > - } else if (cpu_is_omap2420())
> > > > > > - pbase = OMAP2420_32KSYNCT_BASE + 0x10;
> > > > > > - else if (cpu_is_omap2430())
> > > > > > - pbase = OMAP2430_32KSYNCT_BASE + 0x10;
> > > > > > - else if (cpu_is_omap34xx())
> > > > > > - pbase = OMAP3430_32KSYNCT_BASE + 0x10;
> > > > > > - else if (cpu_is_omap44xx())
> > > > > > - pbase = OMAP4430_32KSYNCT_BASE + 0x10;
> > > > > > - else
> > > > > > + u32 pbase;
> > > > > > + unsigned long size = SZ_4K;
> > > > > > + void __iomem *base;
> > > > > > + struct clk *sync_32k_ick;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + if (cpu_is_omap16xx()) {
> > > > > > + pbase = OMAP16XX_TIMER_32K_SYNCHRONIZED;
> > > > > > + size = SZ_1K;
> > > > > > + } else if (cpu_class_is_omap2()) {
> > > > > > + struct omap_hwmod *oh;
> > > > > > + const char *oh_name = "counter_32k";
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + oh = omap_hwmod_lookup(oh_name);
> > > > > > + if (!oh || oh->slaves_cnt == 0) {
> > > > > > + pr_err("Could not lookup %s hwmod\n", oh_name);
> > > > > > return -ENODEV;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + pbase = oh->slaves[0]->addr->pa_start + 0x10;
> > > > > > + } else {
> > > > > > + return -ENODEV;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > >
> > > > > How about have separate omap1 and omap2+ init functions that
> > > > > call a common function and passes the pbase as a parameter?
> > > > >
> > > > > That way we can get rid of the cpu_is_omapxxxx tests here.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Tony,
> > > >
> > > > In the morning, I replied very soon, without much thinking...
> > > >
> > > > Just now I started working on the patch, I was just reviewing the code,
> > > > and I felt that, it is unnecessary to split the code between omap1 and
> > > > omap2+.
> > > >
> > > > The reason is,
> > > >
> > > > Currently Only OMAP16xx base-address is hardcoded with
> > > > cpu_is_omap16xx() macro, For all other omap family of devices the
> > > > complete information is fetched from HWDMO api's/data.
> > >
> > > In that case, why don't you create the platform_device by hand on
> > > arch/arm/mach-omap1/devices.c and move the omap2+ (which is based on
> > > hwmod) to arch/arm/mach-omap2/devices.c ?
> > >
> >
> > Balbi,
> >
> > 32k_counter code is not a platform_device/driver, we don't build the
> > any device here. We only need hwmod data to fetch the basic information
> > like,
> > base-address, size, etc...
> >
> > And I am note sure whether we really intend to make it
> > platform_device/driver thing.
>
> that's kinda weird...
Balbi,
Its not that weird, I think its because, this code is used as system
clocksource.
> anyway, you can also pass base as argument to
> omap_init_clocksource_32k()... dunno.
>
That's the whole point, just for one platform (omap16xx), we are changing the
code. Rest all other platforms are using hwmod data, which is I believe
is clean interface as of now.
To be more specific, we have to choose between something like -
"arch/arm/mach-omap1/timer32k.c"
bool __init omap_32k_timer_init(void) {
omap_init_clocksource_32k(OMAP16XX_TIMER_32K_SYNCHRONIZED, SZ_1K);
...
}
"arch/arm/mach-omap2/timer.c"
static void __init omap2_gp_clocksource_init(int gptimer_id,
const char *fck_source)
{
/* Parse the hwmod data here*/
Base = oh->slaves[0]->addr->pa_start + 0x10;
Size = oh->slaves[0]->addr->pa_end - oh->slaves[0]->addr->pa_start;
res = omap_init_clocksource_32k(base, size);
if (!res)
return;
/* Fall back to gptimer */
}
OR
My current patch, which actually add cpu_is_16xx() check at one place and
does everything.
Thanks,
Vaibhav
> --
> balbi
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
