[PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Shubhrajyoti D]

Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
same.

Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
---
Applies on top of patches from Andy Green
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg05632.html
Tested on OMAP4430

 arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c |    3 ++-
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
index 0fe9556..5e2c748 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
@@ -2130,7 +2130,8 @@ static struct omap_hwmod_class omap44xx_i2c_hwmod_class = {
 };
 
 static struct omap_i2c_dev_attr i2c_dev_attr = {
-	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE,
+	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE |
+			OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE,
 };
 
 /* i2c1 */
-- 
1.7.1

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Ben Dooks]

On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:50:46PM +0530, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
> same.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>

I guess since the previous set has been taken by Kevin
then these will be too.

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Kevin Hilman]

Ben Dooks <ben-i2c@fluff.org> writes:

> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:50:46PM +0530, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
>> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
>> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
>> same.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti@ti.com>
>
> I guess since the previous set has been taken by Kevin
> then these will be too.

Sure, I'll pick these up, but it's probably to late for v3.1.

We've already submitted the bulk of the OMAP stuff for v3.1.

Kevin

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Hilman, Kevin]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Kevin Hilman <khilman-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> Ben Dooks <ben-i2c-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:50:46PM +0530, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
>>> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
>>> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
>>> same.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> I guess since the previous set has been taken by Kevin
>> then these will be too.
>
> Sure, I'll pick these up, but it's probably to late for v3.1.
>
> We've already submitted the bulk of the OMAP stuff for v3.1.

I should've also said I'll pick these up when they are ready.  There
are still some comments that need addressing.

Kevin

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Shubhrajyoti]

On Thursday 14 July 2011 02:57 AM, Hilman, Kevin wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Kevin Hilman<khilman@ti.com>  wrote:
>> Ben Dooks<ben-i2c@fluff.org>  writes:
>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:50:46PM +0530, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
>>>> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
>>>> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
>>>> same.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti@ti.com>
>>> I guess since the previous set has been taken by Kevin
>>> then these will be too.
>> Sure, I'll pick these up, but it's probably to late for v3.1.
>>
>> We've already submitted the bulk of the OMAP stuff for v3.1.
Kevin in the folowing I tried taking the comments do do have any
further comments or suggestions.

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg05823.html

> I should've also said I'll pick these up when they are ready.  There
> are still some comments that need addressing.
>
> Kevin

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Kevin Hilman]

Shubhrajyoti <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> writes:

> On Thursday 14 July 2011 02:57 AM, Hilman, Kevin wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Kevin Hilman<khilman-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>  wrote:
>>> Ben Dooks<ben-i2c-elnMNo+KYs3YtjvyW6yDsg@public.gmane.org>  writes:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 02:50:46PM +0530, Shubhrajyoti D wrote:
>>>>> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
>>>>> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
>>>>> same.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>>>> I guess since the previous set has been taken by Kevin
>>>> then these will be too.
>>> Sure, I'll pick these up, but it's probably to late for v3.1.
>>>
>>> We've already submitted the bulk of the OMAP stuff for v3.1.
> Kevin in the folowing I tried taking the comments do do have any
> further comments or suggestions.
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg05823.html

Sorry, my ti.com email got unsubscribed from vger lists for a couple
days around July 5 & 6, so I missed that one.

It's always best to directly Cc people you are expecting to get review
comments from.

I'll reply to your updated one shortly.

Kevin

[PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0]

From: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>

Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
same.

Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
---
Applies on top of patches from Andy Green
http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg05632.html

 arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c |    3 ++-
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
index 0fe9556..5e2c748 100644
--- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
+++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
@@ -2130,7 +2130,8 @@ static struct omap_hwmod_class omap44xx_i2c_hwmod_class = {
 };
 
 static struct omap_i2c_dev_attr i2c_dev_attr = {
-	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE,
+	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE |
+			OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE,
 };
 
 /* i2c1 */
-- 
1.7.1

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Kevin Hilman]

shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org writes:

> From: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>
> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
> same.
>
> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>

Please Cc linux-omap as this change to the hwmod data would go through
Tony.

Also, please describe why this hwmod data change affects the problem
described in the changelog.

Kevin

> ---
> Applies on top of patches from Andy Green
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg05632.html
>
>  arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c |    3 ++-
>  1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
> index 0fe9556..5e2c748 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
> @@ -2130,7 +2130,8 @@ static struct omap_hwmod_class omap44xx_i2c_hwmod_class = {
>  };
>  
>  static struct omap_i2c_dev_attr i2c_dev_attr = {
> -	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE,
> +	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE |
> +			OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE,
>  };
>  
>  /* i2c1 */

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Shubhrajyoti]

On Monday 20 June 2011 09:05 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org writes:
>
>> From: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>>
>> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
>> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
>> same.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
> Please Cc linux-omap as this change to the hwmod data would go through
> Tony.
Yes , missed out.
> Also, please describe why this hwmod data change affects the problem
> described in the changelog.
>
After Andy's patch set
<code snippet>
static void omap_i2c_unidle(struct omap_i2c_dev *dev)
{
<snip>

         pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);

         if (pdata->flags & OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE) {
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, 0);
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_PSC_REG, dev->pscstate);
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SCLL_REG, dev->scllstate);
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SCLH_REG, dev->sclhstate);
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_BUF_REG, dev->bufstate);
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SYSC_REG, dev->syscstate);
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_WE_REG, dev->westate);
                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, OMAP_I2C_CON_EN);
         }
         dev->idle = 0;

This is dependent on the flag, I am making it true for OMAP4 also.

> Kevin
>
>> ---
>> Applies on top of patches from Andy Green
>> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-i2c/msg05632.html
>>
>>   arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c |    3 ++-
>>   1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
>> index 0fe9556..5e2c748 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c
>> @@ -2130,7 +2130,8 @@ static struct omap_hwmod_class omap44xx_i2c_hwmod_class = {
>>   };
>>
>>   static struct omap_i2c_dev_attr i2c_dev_attr = {
>> -	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE,
>> +	.flags  = OMAP_I2C_FLAG_BUS_SHIFT_NONE |
>> +			OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE,
>>   };
>>
>>   /* i2c1 */

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Kevin Hilman]

Shubhrajyoti <shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org> writes:

> On Monday 20 June 2011 09:05 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>> shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org writes:
>>
>>> From: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>>>
>>> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
>>> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
>>> same.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>> Please Cc linux-omap as this change to the hwmod data would go through
>> Tony.
> Yes , missed out.
>> Also, please describe why this hwmod data change affects the problem
>> described in the changelog.
>>
> After Andy's patch set
> <code snippet>
> static void omap_i2c_unidle(struct omap_i2c_dev *dev)
> {
> <snip>
>
>         pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
>
>         if (pdata->flags & OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE) {
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, 0);
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_PSC_REG, dev->pscstate);
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SCLL_REG, dev->scllstate);
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SCLH_REG, dev->sclhstate);
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_BUF_REG, dev->bufstate);
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SYSC_REG, dev->syscstate);
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_WE_REG, dev->westate);
>                 omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, OMAP_I2C_CON_EN);
>         }
>         dev->idle = 0;
>
> This is dependent on the flag, I am making it true for OMAP4 also.

What I meant was: please describe this in the changelog.  Without more
detail, the hwmod change itself is not understandable.

Kevin

Re: [PATCH][RFC] OMAP4: I2C : I2C context save

[Shubhrajyoti]

On Wednesday 06 July 2011 12:01 AM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
> Shubhrajyoti<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>  writes:
>
>> On Monday 20 June 2011 09:05 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote:
>>> shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org writes:
>>>
>>>> From: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>>>>
>>>> Currently the OMAP4 doesnot hit device off still the
>>>> driver may have support for it.Adding support for the
>>>> same.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Shubhrajyoti D<shubhrajyoti-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
>>> Please Cc linux-omap as this change to the hwmod data would go through
>>> Tony.
>> Yes , missed out.
>>> Also, please describe why this hwmod data change affects the problem
>>> described in the changelog.
>>>
>> After Andy's patch set
>> <code snippet>
>> static void omap_i2c_unidle(struct omap_i2c_dev *dev)
>> {
>> <snip>
>>
>>          pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
>>
>>          if (pdata->flags&  OMAP_I2C_FLAG_RESET_REGS_POSTIDLE) {
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, 0);
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_PSC_REG, dev->pscstate);
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SCLL_REG, dev->scllstate);
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SCLH_REG, dev->sclhstate);
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_BUF_REG, dev->bufstate);
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_SYSC_REG, dev->syscstate);
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_WE_REG, dev->westate);
>>                  omap_i2c_write_reg(dev, OMAP_I2C_CON_REG, OMAP_I2C_CON_EN);
>>          }
>>          dev->idle = 0;
>>
>> This is dependent on the flag, I am making it true for OMAP4 also.
> What I meant was: please describe this in the changelog.  Without more
> detail, the hwmod change itself is not understandable.
Yes , will explain it in the change logs.
> Kevin