> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Lindgren [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 5:20 PM
> To: Premi, Sanjeev
> Cc: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] OMAP3: Add runtime check for OMAP35x
>
> * Premi, Sanjeev <[email protected]> [090806 14:34]:
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Tony Lindgren [mailto:[email protected]]
> > > Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 4:34 PM
> > > To: Premi, Sanjeev
> > > Cc: [email protected]
> > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] OMAP3: Add runtime check for OMAP35x
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > * Sanjeev Premi <[email protected]> [090806 13:36]:
> > > > Added runtime check via omap2_set_globals_35xx().
> > > >
> > > > Parts of this patch have been derived from an earlier
> > > > earlier patch submitted by Tony Lindgren <[email protected]>
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=123301852702797&w=2
> > > > [2] http://marc.info/?l=linux-omap&m=123334055822212&w=2
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Sanjeev Premi <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c | 115
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> > > > arch/arm/plat-omap/common.c | 18 +++++-
> > > > arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/common.h | 1 +
> > > > arch/arm/plat-omap/include/mach/cpu.h | 64
> ++++++++++++++++-
> > > > 4 files changed, 173 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c
> > > > index a98201c..06770aa 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/id.c
> > > > @@ -28,6 +28,14 @@
> > > > static struct omap_chip_id omap_chip;
> > > > static unsigned int omap_revision;
> > > >
> > > > +/* The new OMAP35x devices have assymetric names -
> > > OMAP3505 and OMAP3517.
> > > > + * It is not possible to define a common macro to
> identify them.
> > > > + *
> > > > + * A quick way is to separate them across
> 'generations' as below.
> > > > + */
> > > > +#define OMAP35XX_G1 0x1 /* Applies to 3503,
> > > 3515, 3525 and 3530 */
> > > > +#define OMAP35XX_G2 0x2 /* Applies to 3505 and 3517 */
> > > > +
> > > >
> > > > unsigned int omap_rev(void)
> > > > {
> > > > @@ -155,12 +163,71 @@ void __init omap24xx_check_revision(void)
> > > > pr_info("\n");
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > +static void __init omap34xx_set_revision(u8 rev, char
> *rev_name)
> > > > +{
> > > > + switch (rev) {
> > > > + case 0:
> > > > + omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES2_0;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES2.0");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case 2:
> > > > + omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES2_1;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES2.1");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case 3:
> > > > + omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES3_0;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES3.0");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case 4:
> > > > + omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES3.1");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + default:
> > > > + /* Use the latest known revision as default */
> > > > + omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "Unknown revision");
> > > > + }
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > > > +static void __init omap35xx_set_revision(u8 rev, u8 gen,
> > > char *rev_name)
> > > > +{
> > > > + omap_revision = OMAP35XX_CLASS ;
> > > > +
> > > > + if (gen == OMAP35XX_G1) {
> > > > + switch (rev) {
> > > > + case 0: /* Take care of some older boards */
> > > > + case 1:
> > > > + omap_revision |= OMAP35XX_MASK_ES2_0;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES2.0");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case 2:
> > > > + omap_revision |= OMAP35XX_MASK_ES2_1;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES2.1");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case 3:
> > > > + omap_revision |= OMAP35XX_MASK_ES3_0;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES3.0");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + case 4:
> > > > + omap_revision |= OMAP35XX_MASK_ES3_1;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES3.1");
> > > > + break;
> > > > + default:
> > > > + /* Use the latest known
> revision as default */
> > > > + omap_revision |= OMAP35XX_MASK_ES3_0;
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "Unknown revision");
> > > > + }
> > > > + } else {
> > > > + strcat(rev_name, "ES1.0");
> > > > + }
> > > > +}
> > > > +
> > >
> > > To me it looks like you're checking the exact same cores as
> > > we already do
> > > for 34xx. That is, (idcode >> 28) & 0xff for both 34xx and
> > > 35xx. So basically
> > > they have the same omap cores.
> >
> > No, the cores in OMAP3505 and OMAP3517 are very different.
> > I have listed major differences in PATCH 2/6.
> >
> > These devices differ in following areas:
> > - Power management capabilities
> > (Only 1 power domain, 1 OPP, etc.)
> > - EMIF4 instead of SDRC
> > - Support for DDR2
> > - EMAC
> > - USB
> > - HECC
>
> Sure, but from compiler flags and io point of view they can still
> be treated as 34xx.
>
> How about just add the individual type detection for 35xx processors,
> and then have something like this:
>
> #define cpu_is_omap35xx() (cpu_is_omap34xx() &&
> (cpu_is_omap3510() || \
> cpu_is_omap3520() ||
> cpu_is_omap3530())
>
> That should pretty much shrink this patch series down to
> about 50 lines or
> so of code.
Okay, I will try this. Just not sure if some of the differences
in OMAP3530 and OMAP3430 can be detected.
Will submit a patch soon.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Considering this I don't see much sense adding
> cpu_is_35xx() category
> > > because cpu_is_34xx() already covers these processors. Just
> > > like cpu_is_16xx()
> > > covers both 1610 and 1710.
> > >
> > > Let's just rather add more feature tests for IVA2 etc as
> needed, then
> > > cpu_is_35something() becomse just cpu_is_34xx() &&
> > > cpu_has_iva2() or similar.
> >
> > I did feel the need for these tests as well, and have an
> internal patch.
> > It was in my queue for submission next.
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > void __init omap34xx_check_revision(void)
> > > > {
> > > > u32 cpuid, idcode;
> > > > u16 hawkeye;
> > > > u8 rev;
> > > > - char *rev_name = "ES1.0";
> > > > + char rev_name[16] = "";
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > > > * We cannot access revision registers on ES1.0.
> > > > @@ -184,28 +251,12 @@ void __init omap34xx_check_revision(void)
> > > > rev = (idcode >> 28) & 0xff;
> > > >
> > > > if (hawkeye == 0xb7ae) {
> > > > - switch (rev) {
> > > > - case 0:
> > > > - omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES2_0;
> > > > - rev_name = "ES2.0";
> > > > - break;
> > > > - case 2:
> > > > - omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES2_1;
> > > > - rev_name = "ES2.1";
> > > > - break;
> > > > - case 3:
> > > > - omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES3_0;
> > > > - rev_name = "ES3.0";
> > > > - break;
> > > > - case 4:
> > > > - omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1;
> > > > - rev_name = "ES3.1";
> > > > - break;
> > > > - default:
> > > > - /* Use the latest known
> revision as default */
> > > > - omap_revision = OMAP3430_REV_ES3_1;
> > > > - rev_name = "Unknown revision\n";
> > > > - }
> > > > + if (cpu_is_omap35xx())
> > > > + omap35xx_set_revision(rev, OMAP35XX_G1,
> > > rev_name);
> > > > + else
> > > > + omap34xx_set_revision(rev, rev_name);
> > > > + } else if (hawkeye == 0xb868) {
> > > > + omap35xx_set_revision(rev, OMAP35XX_G2,
> rev_name);
> > > > }
> > >
> > > Testing for hawkeye == 0xb868 test should just be added into
> > > the current
> > > omap34xx_check_revision().
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Tony
> > >
> > >
>
> --
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
