From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: plagnioj@jcrosoft.com (Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD) Date: Wed, 8 Sep 2010 11:50:58 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] AT91: SAM9G45 - add a separate clock entry for every single TC block In-Reply-To: <4C8750B8.6000107@atmel.com> References: <201009060548.18521.fg@emlix.com> <1283772201-15453-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> <4C8750B8.6000107@atmel.com> Message-ID: <20100908095058.GA3939@game.jcrosoft.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 11:00 Wed 08 Sep , Nicolas Ferre wrote: > Le 07/09/2010 21:42, avictor.za at gmail.com : > > hi, > > > >> +/* One additional fake clock for second TC block */ > >> +static struct clk tcb1_clk = { > >> + .name = "tcb1_clk", > >> + .pmc_mask = 0, > >> + .type = CLK_TYPE_PERIPHERAL, > >> + .parent = &tcb0_clk, > >> +}; > >> + > > > > Looking at this again... since type is CLK_TYPE_PERIPHERAL, when you > > call clk_register() the "parent" is changed to the master clock. > > > > Which means, then later you call clk_enable() the "pmc_mask" is still > > 0, so 0 gets written (in pmc_periph_mode) to AT91_PMC_PCER. So the > > TCB clock won't be enabled. > > > > Or am I missing something? > > You are absolutely right! > > What do you think about this modification of clk_register() function? > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/clock.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/clock.c > @@ -501,7 +501,8 @@ postcore_initcall(at91_clk_debugfs_init); > int __init clk_register(struct clk *clk) > { > if (clk_is_peripheral(clk)) { > - clk->parent = &mck; > + if (!clk->parent) > + clk->parent = &mck; > clk->mode = pmc_periph_mode; > list_add_tail(&clk->node, &clocks); > } > > It is a very little modification which implements what I had in mind > while creating a kind of "child peripheral" clock. so so but until we switch to clkdev it will solve the issue Acked-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD Best Regards, J.