On 09/07/2012 03:56 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:

* Jon Hunter [off-list ref] [120907 13:27]:

quoted

Hi Tony,

On 08/30/2012 03:14 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:

quoted

* Jon Hunter [off-list ref] [120816 08:05]:

quoted

On 08/15/2012 04:11 AM, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote:

quoted

Did we get conclude on this? I haven't got anything further on this
thread, this may block baseport support for the new devices in omap2
family, like AM33xx and OMAP5.

Sorry I have been out of the office. However, no update on this so far.
I need to check with Tony if he has any preference for handling this. I
will follow-up with him and keep you posted.

Jon please repost these without the RFC in the subject line
assuming the pending comments have been addressed so people
can ack them.

I have been working on updating this series to request timer by their
capabilities and avoid using a device ID altogether. In the updated
series using device IDs to request a timer will still work as it does
today, but not when you boot with DT. I have something working now that
is booting fine on omap4 with and without DT [1]. However, I need to do
more thorough testing of the timers in general, probably next week.

Once I have completed my testing I would like to post for review.
However, since posting the original series I have been working on some
needed timer fixes/clean-up which I posted this week [2] for review.
Ideally I should rebase my DT timer work on my timer fixes series but
wanted to see what you thought first.

Yeah those all look good to me. Want to do a git branch against
v3.6-rc4 for those once the comments are dealt with so I can pull
it in for testing to start with?

The fixes series should already be based on top of 3.6-rc4 but will
update based upon comments. The only outstanding comment on those were
the implementation of the __omap_dm_timer_populate_errata() function.
Not sure if you have any comments. Vaibhav and myself are not completely
happy with it. I proposed something else but no feedback on that yet.

Cheers
Jon