From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: rnayak@ti.com (Rajendra Nayak) Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 08:58:48 +0530 Subject: [PATCH v2 6/9] omap: dpll: Add allow_idle/deny_idle support for all DPLL's In-Reply-To: References: <1296813544-25170-1-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> <1296813544-25170-7-git-send-email-santosh.shilimkar@ti.com> Message-ID: <1eea151edf0ed021258c202c6d9b5bc2@mail.gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Walmsley [mailto:paul at pwsan.com] > Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2011 8:27 AM > To: rnayak at ti.com; Santosh Shilimkar > Cc: linux-omap at vger.kernel.org; khilman at ti.com; b-cousson at ti.com; linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] omap: dpll: Add allow_idle/deny_idle support for all DPLL's > > Hi > > On Fri, 4 Feb 2011, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > > > From: Rajendra Nayak > > > > All OMAP3/4 dpll's support hardware level autogating. > > Populate allow_idle/deny_idle function pointers for all > > DPLL's in clkops. > > > > Also for OMAP4, call omap_clk_enable_autoidle() from PM > > core (only with CONFIG_PM) to enable hardware level > > autogating on all clock nodes which support it (For now > > only DPLL nodes) > > > > Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.c | 8 +++++++- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock.h | 1 + > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock3xxx_data.c | 2 +- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/clock44xx_data.c | 2 +- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/pm44xx.c | 4 ++++ > > Looks like you add the allow_idle/deny_idle functions for the OMAP3 CORE > DPLL, but you don't change mach-omap2/pm34xx.c. Any reason for this? Nothing specifically. My initial patchset was enabling these only for OMAP4, So I thought will keep it that way. > It > seems that the current OMAP3 PM code doesn't enable CORE DPLL autoidle. > Do you recall why? Perhaps it is due to some of the autoidle bugs, where > DPLL3 would enter auto-idle while some OMAP3 IP blocks that used CORE > clocks were not idle... I don't recall any such bug, however I will relook at the errata docs and also do some validation around this on OMAP3 and report. Regards, Rajendra > > > - Paul