From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: daniel.lezcano@linaro.org (Daniel Lezcano)
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:25:43 +0100
Subject: [PATCH][V2] ux500 : decouple/recouple gic from the PRCMU
In-Reply-To: <4F33A555.9040504@stericsson.com>
References: <1328782040-7786-1-git-send-email-daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
 <4F33A555.9040504@stericsson.com>
Message-ID: <4F33AD37.4060604@linaro.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 02/09/2012 11:52 AM, Rickard Andersson wrote:
> Hi Daniel!
>
> Please see my embedded comments.
>
> Also should we not keep the functions in pm.c file? I think Linus W
> advised us not to move stuff around at this stage.

The pm.c file does not exists for mach-ux500. May be I misunderstood 
Linus but I thought he was saying to that we should "not move stuff 
around" by letting this code in the db8500-prcmu.c file for the moment 
and let Mattias do its cleanups.

> BR
> Rickard
>> This patch allows to decouple and recouple the gic from the PRCMU.
>> This is needed to put the A9 core in retention mode with the cpuidle
>> driver.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Daniel Lezcano<daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>
>> ---
>> drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> include/linux/mfd/db8500-prcmu.h | 2 ++
>> include/linux/mfd/dbx500-prcmu.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
>> 3 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
>> index af8e0ef..70f39a1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/db8500-prcmu.c
>> @@ -787,6 +787,35 @@ int db8500_prcmu_set_power_state(u8 state, bool
>> keep_ulp_clk, bool keep_ap_pll)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +#define PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ 0x00000328
>> +#define PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ_MASK 0x00000001
>> +#define PRCMU_GIC_DELAY 1
>> +
>> +/* This function decouple the gic from the prcmu */
>> +void db8500_prcmu_gic_decouple(void)
>> +{
>> + u32 val = readl(_PRCMU_BASE + PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ);
>> +
>> + /* Set bit 0 register value to 1 */
>> + writel((val& ~PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ_MASK) | PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ_MASK,
>> + _PRCMU_BASE + PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ);
> No need to AND with ~PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ_MASK. This is enough:
>
> writel((val | PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ_MASK,
> _PRCMU_BASE + PRCMU_A9_MASK_REQ);

Yep, right.


[ cut ]

>> +static inline void prcmu_gic_disable(void)
>> +{
>> + if (machine_is_u5500())
>> + return;
>> + else
>> + return db8500_prcmu_gic_disable();
>> +}
> We have change name of this function in the .c file
>> +
>> +static inline void prcmu_gic_enable(void)
>> +{
>> + if (machine_is_u5500())
>> + return;
>> + else
>> + return db8500_prcmu_gic_enable();
>> +}
> We have change name of this function in the .c file

Do you want that in db8500-prcmu.c and declare the function in 
db8500-prcmu.h or dbx500-prcmu.h ?


-- 
  <http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org ? Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog