> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:linux-omap-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Pandita, Vikram
> Sent: Saturday, July 10, 2010 12:39 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Cc: Pandita, Vikram
> Subject: [PATCH 1/3] omap: sram: fix is_sram_locked check
>
> For OMAP24xx/34xx/44xx: omap_type() returns the correct type:
> OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_TEST
> OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_EMU
> OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_SEC
> OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_GP
> OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_BAD
>
> In current implementation there are two problems:
> Problem 1:
> For 34xx, the current if check will never return true.
>
> Problem 2:
> For 24xx the correct type check should be with omap_type() function
> Verified by checking the TRM 24xx for CONTROL_STATUS register bits
>
> Signed-off-by: Vikram Pandita <[email protected]>
> ---
> arch/arm/plat-omap/sram.c | 7 +------
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/plat-omap/sram.c b/arch/arm/plat-omap/sram.c
> index 226b2e8..2eb5a27 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/plat-omap/sram.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/plat-omap/sram.c
> @@ -93,16 +93,11 @@ extern unsigned long omapfb_reserve_sram(unsigned long
> sram_pstart,
> */
> static int is_sram_locked(void)
> {
> - int type = 0;
> -
> if (cpu_is_omap44xx())
> /* Not yet supported */
> return 0;
>
> - if (cpu_is_omap242x())
> - type = omap_rev() & OMAP2_DEVICETYPE_MASK;
> -
> - if (type == GP_DEVICE) {
> + if (OMAP2_DEVICE_TYPE_GP == omap_type()) {
> /* RAMFW: R/W access to all initiators for all qualifier sets
> */
> if (cpu_is_omap242x()) {
> __raw_writel(0xFF, OMAP24XX_VA_REQINFOPERM0); /* all q-
> vects */
This one looks fine to me.
--
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
