From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Igor Grinberg Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: timer: remove CONFIG_OMAP_32K_TIMER Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 13:28:47 +0200 Message-ID: <509F8BEF.90008@compulab.co.il> References: <1352299344-8011-1-git-send-email-grinberg@compulab.co.il> <509AD478.1050904@ti.com> <509B666F.6080507@compulab.co.il> <509BFFDF.9040605@ti.com> <79CD15C6BA57404B839C016229A409A83EB68799@DBDE01.ent.ti.com> <509C050C.6010201@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from softlayer.compulab.co.il ([50.23.254.55]:35255 "EHLO compulab.co.il" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751050Ab2KKL2x (ORCPT ); Sun, 11 Nov 2012 06:28:53 -0500 In-Reply-To: <509C050C.6010201@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Jon Hunter Cc: "Hiremath, Vaibhav" , Tony Lindgren , "Hilman, Kevin" , Paul Walmsley , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "Shilimkar, Santosh" On 11/08/12 21:16, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 11/08/2012 12:59 PM, Hiremath, Vaibhav wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 00:24:23, Hunter, Jon wrote: >>> >>> On 11/08/2012 01:59 AM, Igor Grinberg wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> There is no reliable way to determine which source should be used in runtime >>>> for boards that do not have the 32k oscillator wired. >>> >>> So thinking about this some more and given that we are moving away from >>> board files, if a board does not provide a 32kHz clock source, then this >>> should be reflected in the device-tree source file for that board. >>> Hence, at boot time we should be able to determine if a 32kHz clock >>> source can be used. >>> >> >> Let me feed some more thoughts here :) >> >> The way it is being detected currently is based on timer idle status bit. >> I am worried that, this is the only option we have. > > Why not use device-tree to indicate the presence of a 32k clock source? > This seems like a board level configuration and so device-tree seems to > be the perfect place for this IMO. Well, that is what my commit message says... -- Regards, Igor. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: grinberg@compulab.co.il (Igor Grinberg) Date: Sun, 11 Nov 2012 13:28:47 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP2+: timer: remove CONFIG_OMAP_32K_TIMER In-Reply-To: <509C050C.6010201@ti.com> References: <1352299344-8011-1-git-send-email-grinberg@compulab.co.il> <509AD478.1050904@ti.com> <509B666F.6080507@compulab.co.il> <509BFFDF.9040605@ti.com> <79CD15C6BA57404B839C016229A409A83EB68799@DBDE01.ent.ti.com> <509C050C.6010201@ti.com> Message-ID: <509F8BEF.90008@compulab.co.il> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 11/08/12 21:16, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 11/08/2012 12:59 PM, Hiremath, Vaibhav wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 00:24:23, Hunter, Jon wrote: >>> >>> On 11/08/2012 01:59 AM, Igor Grinberg wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> There is no reliable way to determine which source should be used in runtime >>>> for boards that do not have the 32k oscillator wired. >>> >>> So thinking about this some more and given that we are moving away from >>> board files, if a board does not provide a 32kHz clock source, then this >>> should be reflected in the device-tree source file for that board. >>> Hence, at boot time we should be able to determine if a 32kHz clock >>> source can be used. >>> >> >> Let me feed some more thoughts here :) >> >> The way it is being detected currently is based on timer idle status bit. >> I am worried that, this is the only option we have. > > Why not use device-tree to indicate the presence of a 32k clock source? > This seems like a board level configuration and so device-tree seems to > be the perfect place for this IMO. Well, that is what my commit message says... -- Regards, Igor.