> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 7:41 PM
> To: Paulraj, Sandeep
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] DM365 SOC specific File
>
> "Paulraj, Sandeep" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> >>
> >> You added sysclk5-9, but dropped sysclkbp. Looks like there's a
> >> sysckbp in the spec, and is used as USB ref clock.
> >
> > [Sandeep] will add but I believe there are multiple ways to source USB
> clock.
>
> OK, but all the sources should still be defined.
>
> [...]
> >>
> >> Hmm, the spec only shows PLL2 SYSCLK1-5, and you have 6-9 as well.
> >> Is that a spec bug or a copy-paste bug?
> >
> > [Sandeep] definitely not a copy paste error. I use it in the UBL
> > which BTW I design so I know it is used. Don't know if TI wants to
> > keep it a "secret".
>
> Well, the secret is out. :)
[Sandeep] as I mentioned in another e-mail
PLL1->PLLDIV8 = 0x8003; // POST DIV 486/4 -> MMC0/SD0
The above is from UBL code
So for the MMC driver to work properly I need SYSCLK8.
That does not leave me with much room for maneuver does it?
>
> [...]
>
> >> > +static struct clk timer2_clk = {
> >> > + .name = "timer2",
> >> > + .parent = &ref_clk,
> >> > + .lpsc = DAVINCI_LPSC_TIMER2,
> >> > + .usecount = 1, /* REVISIT: why cant' this be
> disabled?
> >> */
> >> > +};
> >>
> >> Is this really a problem on dm365 also? or is this a copy-paste
> remnant
> >> from dm355?
> >
> > [Sandeep] I'll check it out myself. Till then it is most probably
> > because I copy pasted
>
> The easiest way is to test with the disable-unused-clocks feature
> enabled and see if this clock can be disabled.
[Sandeep] OK
>
> [...]
>
> >> > +static int __init dm365_init_devices(void)
> >> > +{
> >> > + if (!cpu_is_davinci_dm365())
> >> > + return 0;
> >> > +
> >> > + return 0;
> >> > +}
> >> > +postcore_initcall(dm365_init_devices);
> >>
> >> Another copy paste problem. You don't need an empty initcall.
> > [Sandeep] This was intentional.
> >>
> >> Is there any reason you didn't include the EDMA stuff which is what
> >> this initcall is used for in dm355?
> >
> > [Sandeep] I was under the impression that EDMA has to be added in a
> > separate patch
>
> I'd prefer it in a separate patch, yes.
[Sandeep] OK
>
> >> If you're not going to included EDMA, then add this initcall when you
> >> need it.
> > [Sandeep] I am going to in subsequent patches.
> > The truth of the matter is I am supposed to leave it for someone else to
> add EDMA so just laid the groundwork
>
> OK, then add this initcall along with the EDMA support.
[Sandeep] OK
>
> Kevin
>
>
_______________________________________________
Davinci-linux-open-source mailing list
[email protected]
http://linux.davincidsp.com/mailman/listinfo/davinci-linux-open-source
