From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Santosh Shilimkar Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP5/DRA7: realtime_counter: Configure CNTFRQ register Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 09:45:13 -0400 Message-ID: <5239AE69.6040600@ti.com> References: <1379503416-26318-1-git-send-email-r.sricharan@ti.com> <5239AB2C.1090201@ti.com> <5239AE35.8030406@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from devils.ext.ti.com ([198.47.26.153]:50665 "EHLO devils.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751344Ab3IRNqT (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Sep 2013 09:46:19 -0400 In-Reply-To: <5239AE35.8030406@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Nishanth Menon Cc: Sricharan R , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, rnayak@ti.com, tony@atomide.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com On Wednesday 18 September 2013 09:44 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 09/18/2013 08:31 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> On Wednesday 18 September 2013 07:23 AM, Sricharan R wrote: > [...] > 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0); >>> >>> /* >>> + * Configure the CNTFRQ register for the secondary cpu's which >>> + * indicates the frequency of the cpu local timers. >>> + */ >>> + if (soc_is_omap54xx() || soc_is_dra7xx()) >> CNTFREQ programming was not supported on OMAP5 ES1.0 and that was one >> of the reason this parameter came into picture. So you need to skip >> the ES1.0 here. >> > Even though ES1.0 is present in id.c, we have 0 support for ES1.0. > > ES1.0 was more or less a test chip, no production devices were > manufactured with it, no public boards (including uevms) are available > to purchase with ES1.0. Further, inside TI, all ES1.0 samples and > boards have been scrapped and replaced with ES2.0 platforms. > > In short, no users and dead code in kernel tree. I dont see why we > cant just cleanup OMAP5 ES1.0 entirely from kernel tree? > Yes...There is no reason to keep broken ES1.0 support. Patch please ;-) Regards, Santosh From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: santosh.shilimkar@ti.com (Santosh Shilimkar) Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2013 09:45:13 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP5/DRA7: realtime_counter: Configure CNTFRQ register In-Reply-To: <5239AE35.8030406@ti.com> References: <1379503416-26318-1-git-send-email-r.sricharan@ti.com> <5239AB2C.1090201@ti.com> <5239AE35.8030406@ti.com> Message-ID: <5239AE69.6040600@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wednesday 18 September 2013 09:44 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote: > On 09/18/2013 08:31 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: >> On Wednesday 18 September 2013 07:23 AM, Sricharan R wrote: > [...] > 4, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0); >>> >>> /* >>> + * Configure the CNTFRQ register for the secondary cpu's which >>> + * indicates the frequency of the cpu local timers. >>> + */ >>> + if (soc_is_omap54xx() || soc_is_dra7xx()) >> CNTFREQ programming was not supported on OMAP5 ES1.0 and that was one >> of the reason this parameter came into picture. So you need to skip >> the ES1.0 here. >> > Even though ES1.0 is present in id.c, we have 0 support for ES1.0. > > ES1.0 was more or less a test chip, no production devices were > manufactured with it, no public boards (including uevms) are available > to purchase with ES1.0. Further, inside TI, all ES1.0 samples and > boards have been scrapped and replaced with ES2.0 platforms. > > In short, no users and dead code in kernel tree. I dont see why we > cant just cleanup OMAP5 ES1.0 entirely from kernel tree? > Yes...There is no reason to keep broken ES1.0 support. Patch please ;-) Regards, Santosh