Re: [PATCH] OMAP4: clockdomain: Follow recommended enable sequence

[Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>]

On 3/12/2011 1:23 PM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> Hi Kevin,
>
> On 3/11/2011 10:17 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> Rajendra Nayak<rnayak@ti.com>  writes:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>>
>>>> It's also breaking boot on OMAP35xx BeagleBoard rev C2.  The kernel
>>>> boot messages are below - omap2plus_defconfig + DEBUG_LL.  Reverting
>>>> the patch fixes it.  Could you please take a look?
>>>
>>> I got hold of a Beagle, a sticker on which says rev C1D.
>>> Not sure if there is a better way to identify the rev, but
>>> this one seems to boot fine for me even with this patch.
>>> I just applied this one patch on top of the the tag
>>> 'integration-2.6.39-20110310-008' of git://git.pwsan.com/linux-
>>> integration.
>>
>> In the process of testing Santosh's OMAP4 PM series (which includes
>> $SUBJECT patch) on OMAP3, I also noticed some problems on beagle (mine
>> is a C3.)
>>
>> Specifially, with $SUBJECT patch applied, none of the powerdomains ever
>> reach inactive or RET during idle (suspend seems to work fine.)
>>
>> Just reverting $SUBJECT patch makes things go back to working normally.
>>
>> I pushed the test branch I used which is a merge of Santosh's v3 branch
>> with my pm branch (branch: tmp/santosh-omap4-pm)
>>
>> I tested by first doing a suspend test and confirming all the
>> powerdomains hit retention.  That worked fine.  Then I did an idle test:
>>
>>    echo 5>  /sys/devices/platform/omap/omap_uart.0/sleep_timeout
>>    echo 5>  /sys/devices/platform/omap/omap_uart.1/sleep_timeout
>>    echo 5>  /sys/devices/platform/omap/omap_uart.2/sleep_timeout
>>    echo 1>  /debug/pm_debug/sleep_while_idle
>>
>> and waited for the UARTs to timeout.
>>
>> Well after the UART timeouts expired, I do not see any powerdomains
>> transitioning from ON.
>>
>> What's even more strange is that the same thing is working fine on all
>> the other OMAP3 platforms I tested: 3430/n900, 3630/zoom3 and even a
>> different 3530-based platform, the OMAP3EVM.
>
> I probably know whats going wrong with this patch, even though I
> haven't really been able to reproduce any of these issues myself.
>
> The below change which should be the only one affecting non-OMAP4
> platforms actually is calling clkdm_allow_idle() for all clkdms
> without really checking for a CLKDM_CAN_ENABLE_AUTO flag, which
> seems wrong. I was somehow under the impression that the
> clkdm_allow_idle() function would internally do this check but
> that does not seem to be the case.

Actually I was wrong, clkdm_allow_idle() does seem to have a
check for the CLKDM_CAN_ENABLE_AUTO flag.