Re: [PATCH 04/10] OMAP4: hwmod: Replace OCPIF_HAS_IDLEST by HWMOD_NO_IDLEST

[Kevin Hilman <khilman@deeprootsystems.com>]

Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com> writes:

> Some initiator modules in OMAP2 & 3 does not have IDLEST bit,
> in that case we cannot detect the module readiness by
> polling that bit and must exist the function immediately
> assuming that the module is ready.
>
> The previous flag was affected to the OCP interface. While it is
> technically true that the idlest is related to the L4 slave
> interface of the module, the PRCM status belong to the module.
>
> Signed-off-by: Benoit Cousson <b-cousson@ti.com>
> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>

We had some discussions off-list on this patch... summarizing below.

> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c             |    2 +-
>  arch/arm/plat-omap/include/plat/omap_hwmod.h |    8 +++++---
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> index 4a134c4..6459d07 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c
> @@ -808,7 +808,7 @@ static int _wait_target_ready(struct omap_hwmod *oh)
>  
>  	os = *oh->slaves + oh->_mpu_port_index;
>  
> -	if (!(os->flags & OCPIF_HAS_IDLEST))
> +	if (oh->flags & HWMOD_NO_IDLEST)
>  		return 0;

This changes the default from assuming a module doesn't have an IDLEST
to assuming it does.

Because of this, we now get a bunch of failures in _enable() on
OMAP2/3 due to missing fields in the hwmods, in particular the members
of the 'struct omap_hwmod_omap2_prcm' are required to get correct
_wait_for_ready() behavior.

Therefore, when creating new hwmods, please be sure the fields of this
struct are filled out and correct.

Kevin