From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: b-cousson@ti.com (Cousson, Benoit) Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 19:14:52 +0200 Subject: [PATCHv4 4/8] ARM: OMAP4: hwmod: flag hwmods/modules supporting module level context status In-Reply-To: <1335278815.2149.93.camel@sokoban> References: <1334913591-26312-1-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <1334913591-26312-5-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <4F957ACD.2040103@ti.com> <1335278815.2149.93.camel@sokoban> Message-ID: <4F96DF8C.6040400@ti.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 4/24/2012 4:46 PM, Tero Kristo wrote: > On Mon, 2012-04-23 at 10:52 -0500, Jon Hunter wrote: >> Hi Tero, >> >> On 04/20/2012 04:19 AM, Tero Kristo wrote: >>> From: Rajendra Nayak >>> >>> On OMAP4 most modules/hwmods support module level context status. On >>> OMAP3 and earlier, we relyed on the power domain level context status. >>> Identify all such modules using a 'HWMOD_CONTEXT_REG' flag, all such >>> hwmods already have a valid 'context_offs' populated in .prcm structure. >> >> Is it necessary to add another flag? Can't we just check if context_offs >> is non-zero? Would save adding a lot more lines to an already large file >> :-) > > Actually one of the older versions of this patch was just checking > against a non-zero value, but it was decided to be changed as > potentially the context_offs can be zero even if it is a valid offset. Yeah, but still, every OMAP4 IPs are supporting that except two of them I guess, so it is a pity to add that to every IPs. We'd better add a HWMOD_NO_CONTEXT_REG to the few IPs that are not supporting that. Since OMAP 2 & 3 does not have this feature at all, we can check on the cpu revision. I think the issue raised by Rajendra was about AM35xx that looks like an OMAP3 variant but does have these registers like an OMAP4 variant:-( Regards, Benoit