[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/6] am33xx: Enable UART{1,2,4,5} clocks

[Tom Rini <trini@ti.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 09/27/12 10:27, Marek Vasut wrote:
> Dear Tom Rini,
> 
>> On 09/27/12 10:11, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>> Dear Tom Rini,
>>> 
>>>> On 09/27/12 09:45, Marek Vasut wrote:
>>>>> Dear Tom Rini,
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 06:13:36PM +0200, Marek Vasut 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Dear Andrew Bradford,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> If configured to use UART{1,2,4,5}, such as on the 
>>>>>>>> Beaglebone RS232 cape, enable the required clocks
>>>>>>>> for the UART in use.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Andrew Bradford 
>>>>>>>> <andrew@bradfordembedded.com> ---
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c |   28 
>>>>>>>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 28 
>>>>>>>> insertions(+)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c 
>>>>>>>> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c index 
>>>>>>>> 2b19506..4eb9226 100644 --- 
>>>>>>>> a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c +++ 
>>>>>>>> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c @@ -114,6
>>>>>>>> +114,34 @@ static void enable_per_clocks(void)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> while (readl(&cmwkup->wkup_uart0ctrl) !=
>>>>>>>> PRCM_MOD_EN) ;
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> +	/* UART1 */ +#ifdef CONFIG_SERIAL2 + 
>>>>>>>> writel(PRCM_MOD_EN, &cmper->uart1clkctrl); +	while 
>>>>>>>> (readl(&cmper->uart1clkctrl) != PRCM_MOD_EN) +		;
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Call WATCHDOG_RESET() here, fix glboally
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We don't have WATCHDOG_RESET...
>>>>> 
>>>>> You do, and it opts-out to udelay(1) is most cases.
>>>> 
>>>> It looks like it opts-out to {} in most cases, in 
>>>> <watchdog.h>
>>> 
>>> Correct, we use it to retrigger watchdog timer if implemented.
>> 
>> Which the SoC support isn't doing and the rest of the code also 
>> isn't trying to use.  Arguably the whole file should be doing 
>> udelay(1) in each of these instances and a clean up patch which 
>> this series depends on might be useful.
> 
> So we're changing the practice from doing WATCHDOG_RESET() to 
> udelay(1) ? And we're doing so in generic code?

I think we should use WATCHDOG_RESET where it makes sense and udelay
where we're just delaying.  I don't see WATCHDOG_RESET() being used
for enable this-or-that clock.  But maybe I'm just really missing
something about how we use WATCHDOG_RESET in the case where it's not a
nop.

- -- 
Tom
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=HfDf
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----