From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Heiko =?iso-8859-1?q?St=FCbner?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] ARM: S3C24XX: Add forgotten clock lookup table to S3C2443 Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 00:37:07 +0200 Message-ID: <201204030037.07993.heiko@sntech.de> References: <201203121959.32966.heiko@sntech.de> <201203122000.31216.heiko@sntech.de> <4F7A153A.5070701@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from s15407518.onlinehome-server.info ([82.165.136.167]:60404 "EHLO s15407518.onlinehome-server.info" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751295Ab2DBWhS convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Apr 2012 18:37:18 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4F7A153A.5070701@samsung.com> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: Kukjin Kim Cc: ben-linux@fluff.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org Am Montag 02 April 2012, 23:08:10 schrieb Kukjin Kim: > Heiko St=FCbner wrote: > > When the hsmmc clock lookup was changed to be lookup tables based, > > it seems the S3C2443 was forgotten. > >=20 > > As subsequent patches will want to add more lookups to it, this > > patch adds the base table with the missing hsmmc lookup. > >=20 > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner > > --- > >=20 > > arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >=20 > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c > > b/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c index efb3ac3..bce1cd3 1006= 44 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c > > @@ -179,6 +179,10 @@ static struct clk *clks[] __initdata =3D { > >=20 > > &clk_hsmmc, > > =20 > > }; > >=20 > > +static struct clk_lookup s3c2443_clk_lookup[] =3D { > > + CLKDEV_INIT("s3c-sdhci.1", "mmc_busclk.2",&clk_hsmmc), > > +}; > > + > >=20 > > void __init s3c2443_init_clocks(int xtal) > > { > > =20 > > unsigned long epllcon =3D __raw_readl(S3C2443_EPLLCON); > >=20 > > @@ -210,6 +214,7 @@ void __init s3c2443_init_clocks(int xtal) > >=20 > > s3c_register_clocks(init_clocks_off, ARRAY_SIZE(init_clocks_off)= ); > > s3c_disable_clocks(init_clocks_off, ARRAY_SIZE(init_clocks_off))= ; > >=20 > > + clkdev_add_table(s3c2443_clk_lookup, ARRAY_SIZE(s3c2443_clk_looku= p)); > >=20 > > s3c_pwmclk_init(); > > =20 > > } >=20 > Uhm..how about mach-s3c24xx/common-s3c2443.c? Nope. This clock is really specific to only the s3c2443. There is only = one=20 hsmmc clock that is identical on both the s3c2443 and s3c2416/2450 and = this=20 one already is in common-s3c2443.c . common-s3c2443.c was meant for stuff common to s3c2443 _and newer_, i.e= =2E=20 common clocks and so on. > I think, we need to sort out some files in mach-s3c24xx/ and some > remained mach-s3c24.. directories, actually, as you know, we didn't h= ave > much time to do it last time :) yeah, we did cut it quite close :-), but it also doesn't seem to have p= roduced=20 much fall-out. I moved my s3c2416 based development code to 3.4-rc1 wit= hout=20 major hickups. Getting rid of the remaining mach-directories and also the plat-s3c24xx= would=20 be good. But I'm not sure what you would want to change in mach-s3c24xx= =20 directory itself. I don't know the earlier SoCs, but the s3c2443 and s3c2416/2450 SoCs cu= rrently=20 don't have redundancies and in the current layout it's quite easy to=20 understand what belongs to which SoC. Heiko From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko =?iso-8859-1?q?St=FCbner?=) Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 00:37:07 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 1/6] ARM: S3C24XX: Add forgotten clock lookup table to S3C2443 In-Reply-To: <4F7A153A.5070701@samsung.com> References: <201203121959.32966.heiko@sntech.de> <201203122000.31216.heiko@sntech.de> <4F7A153A.5070701@samsung.com> Message-ID: <201204030037.07993.heiko@sntech.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Am Montag 02 April 2012, 23:08:10 schrieb Kukjin Kim: > Heiko St?bner wrote: > > When the hsmmc clock lookup was changed to be lookup tables based, > > it seems the S3C2443 was forgotten. > > > > As subsequent patches will want to add more lookups to it, this > > patch adds the base table with the missing hsmmc lookup. > > > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner > > --- > > > > arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c > > b/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c index efb3ac3..bce1cd3 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-s3c24xx/clock-s3c2443.c > > @@ -179,6 +179,10 @@ static struct clk *clks[] __initdata = { > > > > &clk_hsmmc, > > > > }; > > > > +static struct clk_lookup s3c2443_clk_lookup[] = { > > + CLKDEV_INIT("s3c-sdhci.1", "mmc_busclk.2",&clk_hsmmc), > > +}; > > + > > > > void __init s3c2443_init_clocks(int xtal) > > { > > > > unsigned long epllcon = __raw_readl(S3C2443_EPLLCON); > > > > @@ -210,6 +214,7 @@ void __init s3c2443_init_clocks(int xtal) > > > > s3c_register_clocks(init_clocks_off, ARRAY_SIZE(init_clocks_off)); > > s3c_disable_clocks(init_clocks_off, ARRAY_SIZE(init_clocks_off)); > > > > + clkdev_add_table(s3c2443_clk_lookup, ARRAY_SIZE(s3c2443_clk_lookup)); > > > > s3c_pwmclk_init(); > > > > } > > Uhm..how about mach-s3c24xx/common-s3c2443.c? Nope. This clock is really specific to only the s3c2443. There is only one hsmmc clock that is identical on both the s3c2443 and s3c2416/2450 and this one already is in common-s3c2443.c . common-s3c2443.c was meant for stuff common to s3c2443 _and newer_, i.e. common clocks and so on. > I think, we need to sort out some files in mach-s3c24xx/ and some > remained mach-s3c24.. directories, actually, as you know, we didn't have > much time to do it last time :) yeah, we did cut it quite close :-), but it also doesn't seem to have produced much fall-out. I moved my s3c2416 based development code to 3.4-rc1 without major hickups. Getting rid of the remaining mach-directories and also the plat-s3c24xx would be good. But I'm not sure what you would want to change in mach-s3c24xx directory itself. I don't know the earlier SoCs, but the s3c2443 and s3c2416/2450 SoCs currently don't have redundancies and in the current layout it's quite easy to understand what belongs to which SoC. Heiko