From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jgchunter@gmail.com (Jon Hunter) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 12:34:03 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: OMAP1: PM: fix some build warnings on 1510-only Kconfigs In-Reply-To: <54DC8DF7.1070302@gmail.com> References: <54D9CFBC.3070405@nvidia.com> <54D9E42C.7010105@gmail.com> <20150211203757.GH2531@atomide.com> <20150211211454.GJ2531@atomide.com> <54DC8DF7.1070302@gmail.com> Message-ID: <54DC9DBB.4000601@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 02/12/2015 11:26 AM, Jon Hunter wrote: > > On 02/11/2015 09:14 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >> * Paul Walmsley [150211 13:03]: >>> On Wed, 11 Feb 2015, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> >>>> * Paul Walmsley [150210 18:28]: >>>>> On Tue, 10 Feb 2015, Jon Hunter wrote: >>>>>> On 07/02/2015 00:23, Paul Walmsley wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Unfortunately, there is not a single TRM for the omap5910 but individual >>>>>> documents for each chapter in the original TRM. Check out the "OMAP5910 >>>>>> Dual-Core Processor Timer Reference Guide" and possibly the "OMAP5910 >>>>>> Dual-Core Processor Clock Generation and System Reset Management >>>>>> Reference Guide" >>>>>> >>>>>> The omap15xx/5910 did have a 32k timer but as you can see it appears it >>>>>> was never supported by the kernel for this device (not sure why). I do >>>>>> recall that there is some errata regarding the 32k timer, if you look at >>>>>> the omap5910 errata document and search for 32k you should find it. >>>>> >>>>> OK thanks for the context. I probably am not going to investigate adding >>>>> support for this timer on OMAP1510/5910 - am primarily trying to avoid >>>>> causing a regression on the existing platforms. >>>> >>>> At least I've never seen the 32KiHz timer registers in any 15xx >>>> documentation. Jon are you sure you're not mixing up 5910 (15xx) >>>> and 5912 (16xx)? >>> >>> It's documented in the OMAP5910 Timer Reference Guide (SPRU682A) Section 3 >>> "32-kHz Timer", at the link Jon mentioned. Have not checked the errata >>> that Jon mentioned though. >> >> Interesting. Looks like it's the same as on 16xx at 0xfffb9000. >> AFAIK that never worked on 15xx. Or maybe the issue was that 15xx >> is missing the constantly running 32KiHz counter making the timer >> unusable from PM point of view as the clockevent alone is not enough. >> >>> Regarding the patch: I'd suggest keeping the compilation warning fixes >>> (which was the original purpose of the patch) from anything that changes >>> the logic too much. That way if there's an error in the patch that >>> changes the logic and it needs to be reverted, it won't also revert the >>> warning fixes. >> >> Makes sense to me. > > Yes that's fine with me as well, I don't wish to over complicate > matters. I have a couple minor comments though and will respond to the > latest patch rev. Actually, nevermind the latest version is fine with me. Jon