All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Cc: Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com>,
	dhylands@gmail.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] ARM: OMAP3: PM: fix I/O wakeup and I/O chain clock control detection
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 13:40:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y5wwk01x.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110061716150.4611@utopia.booyaka.com> (Paul Walmsley's message of "Thu, 6 Oct 2011 17:18:45 -0600 (MDT)")

Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> writes:

> The way that we detect which OMAP3 chips support I/O wakeup and
> software I/O chain clock control is broken.
>
> Currently, I/O wakeup is marked as present for all OMAP3 SoCs other
> than the AM3505/3517.  The TI81xx family of SoCs are at present
> considered to be OMAP3 SoCs, but don't support I/O wakeup.  To resolve
> this, convert the existing blacklist approach to an explicit,
> whitelist support, in which only SoCs which are known to support I/O
> wakeup are listed.  (At present, this only includes OMAP34xx,
> OMAP3503, OMAP3515, OMAP3525, OMAP3530, and OMAP36xx.)
>
> Also, the current code incorrectly detects the presence of a
> software-controllable I/O chain clock on several chips that don't
> support it.  This results in writes to reserved bitfields, unnecessary
> delays, and console messages on kernels running on those chips:
>
>     http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg58735.html
>
> Convert this test to a feature test with a chip-by-chip whitelist.
>
> Thanks to Dave Hylands <dhylands@gmail.com> for reporting this problem
> and doing some testing to help isolate the cause.  Thanks to Steve
> Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com> for catching a bug in the first version of
> this patch.  Thanks to Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> for
> comments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
> Cc: Dave Hylands <dhylands@gmail.com>
> Cc: Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com>
> Tested-by: Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com>
> Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
> ---
>
> This version incorporates some comments from RMK - an unnecessary 
> set of parentheses are removed and a two-part error message string is 
> joined.  Also, the printk(KERN_ERR has been converted into a pr_err(. 

OK, looks like we made some parallel changes.

Dropping my version and will queue this one (branch: for_3.2/pm-cleanup-2)

Kevin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: khilman@ti.com (Kevin Hilman)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3] ARM: OMAP3: PM: fix I/O wakeup and I/O chain clock control detection
Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2011 13:40:26 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y5wwk01x.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1110061716150.4611@utopia.booyaka.com> (Paul Walmsley's message of "Thu, 6 Oct 2011 17:18:45 -0600 (MDT)")

Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com> writes:

> The way that we detect which OMAP3 chips support I/O wakeup and
> software I/O chain clock control is broken.
>
> Currently, I/O wakeup is marked as present for all OMAP3 SoCs other
> than the AM3505/3517.  The TI81xx family of SoCs are at present
> considered to be OMAP3 SoCs, but don't support I/O wakeup.  To resolve
> this, convert the existing blacklist approach to an explicit,
> whitelist support, in which only SoCs which are known to support I/O
> wakeup are listed.  (At present, this only includes OMAP34xx,
> OMAP3503, OMAP3515, OMAP3525, OMAP3530, and OMAP36xx.)
>
> Also, the current code incorrectly detects the presence of a
> software-controllable I/O chain clock on several chips that don't
> support it.  This results in writes to reserved bitfields, unnecessary
> delays, and console messages on kernels running on those chips:
>
>     http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-omap/msg58735.html
>
> Convert this test to a feature test with a chip-by-chip whitelist.
>
> Thanks to Dave Hylands <dhylands@gmail.com> for reporting this problem
> and doing some testing to help isolate the cause.  Thanks to Steve
> Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com> for catching a bug in the first version of
> this patch.  Thanks to Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk> for
> comments.
>
> Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
> Cc: Dave Hylands <dhylands@gmail.com>
> Cc: Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com>
> Tested-by: Steve Sakoman <sakoman@gmail.com>
> Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
> ---
>
> This version incorporates some comments from RMK - an unnecessary 
> set of parentheses are removed and a two-part error message string is 
> joined.  Also, the printk(KERN_ERR has been converted into a pr_err(. 

OK, looks like we made some parallel changes.

Dropping my version and will queue this one (branch: for_3.2/pm-cleanup-2)

Kevin

  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-07 20:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-06 19:11 [PATCH] ARM: OMAP3: PM: fix I/O wakeup and I/O chain clock control detection Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 19:11 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 19:42 ` Steve Sakoman
2011-10-06 19:42   ` Steve Sakoman
2011-10-06 19:46   ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 19:46     ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 19:47   ` [PATCH v2] " Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 19:47     ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 21:22     ` Steve Sakoman
2011-10-06 21:22       ` Steve Sakoman
2011-10-06 21:25       ` [PATCH v3] " Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 21:25         ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 23:46         ` Kevin Hilman
2011-10-06 23:46           ` Kevin Hilman
2011-10-06 22:29     ` [PATCH v2] " Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-10-06 22:29       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-10-06 23:07       ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 23:07         ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 23:18       ` [PATCH v3] " Paul Walmsley
2011-10-06 23:18         ` Paul Walmsley
2011-10-07 20:40         ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2011-10-07 20:40           ` Kevin Hilman

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87y5wwk01x.fsf@ti.com \
    --to=khilman@ti.com \
    --cc=dhylands@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=paul@pwsan.com \
    --cc=sakoman@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.