[PATCH 2/3] ARM: OMAP: hwmod: revise deassert sequence
From: Vaibhav Hiremath <hidden>
Date: 2012-08-03 05:25:11
Also in:
linux-omap, lkml
On 8/3/2012 3:50 AM, Omar Ramirez Luna wrote:
Hi. On 2 August 2012 02:52, Paul Walmsley [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On Mon, 16 Jul 2012, Omar Ramirez Luna wrote:quoted
For a reset sequence to complete cleanly, a module needs its associated clocks to be enabled, otherwise the timeout check in prcm code can print a false failure (failed to hardreset) that occurs because the clocks aren't powered ON and the status bit checked can't transition without them. Signed-off-by: Omar Ramirez Luna <redacted>Is enabling the clocks sufficient?During my testing it seemed enough, besides it looks clk framework is doing the same as _omap4_enable_module.quoted
Or do we also need to enable the IP block, e.g. by calling if (soc_ops.enable_module) soc_ops.enable_module(oh); as we do on OMAP4+ in _enable() ?Basically this is a call to _omap4_enable_module, and the latter will "Enable the modulemode inside CLKCTRL". However, _enable_clocks path which ends calling omap2_dflt_clk_enable does the same thing with its clk->enable_reg field. So in _enable: _enable_clocks(oh); if (soc_ops.enable_module) soc_ops.enable_module(oh); The enable_module part seems redundant to me, since the module should be already enabled by the first call to _enable_clocks.
Yes they do same thing, I believe the plan is to get rid of all clock leaf-nodes in the near future, and let hwmod handle module enable/disable part. Thanks, Vaibhav
Regards, Omar -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html