From: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
To: "Cousson, Benoit" <b-cousson@ti.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Cc: "Semwal, Sumit" <sumit.semwal@ti.com>,
"Taneja, Archit" <archit@ti.com>,
linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: OMAP4 DSS clock setup
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 09:48:53 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1301467733.2333.83.camel@deskari> (raw)
Hi Benoit, Paul,
I've been discussing with Sumit and Archit to understand how the DSS
clocks are set up on OMAP4. I think I now have some idea how things
work, but I'm still at loss why things are the way they are.
So, if I look at OMAP4 TRM, Figure 10-4 DSS Clock Tree, there are two
clocks in PRCM block that are relevant to this discussion: DSS_L3_ICLK
and DSS_FCLK. To my understanding DSS_L3_ICLK is not really
controllable, but it is affected by MODULEMODE bit.
Then we have two relevant clocks defined in clock44xx_data.c: dss_fck
and dss_dss_clk. dss_fck controls the MODULEMODE bit, and dss_dss_clk is
the TRM's DSS_FCLK.
Was that correct?
If so, from DSS driver's perspective, the dss_fck sounds very much like
an interface clock (it's always needed when DSS is used) and dss_dss_clk
sounds very much like functional clock (it's always needed, except if
DSI PLL is used for DSS functional clock).
If "dss_fck" would control DSS_FCLK and "dss_ick" would control
MODULEMODE, they would be about the same as the clocks in OMAP2 and 3,
and we wouldn't need any omap4 spesific trickery in the DSS driver.
("dss_dss_clk" wouldn't be needed).
Why are the clocks set up in this strange fashion?
Tomi
next reply other threads:[~2011-03-30 6:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-30 6:48 Tomi Valkeinen [this message]
2011-03-30 9:32 ` OMAP4 DSS clock setup Cousson, Benoit
2011-03-30 11:03 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-03-30 12:12 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-03-30 12:58 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-03-30 13:21 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-03-31 6:42 ` Archit Taneja
2011-03-31 9:36 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-03-31 7:34 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-02 2:12 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-04-04 6:53 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-06 9:09 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-07 19:27 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-04-08 5:51 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-08 14:55 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-04-11 9:05 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-11 18:20 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-04-12 7:17 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-08 15:36 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-04-08 16:35 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-08 16:28 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-04-11 8:56 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-11 16:05 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-04-11 21:06 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-04-11 21:29 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-04-12 7:29 ` Tomi Valkeinen
2011-04-08 14:23 ` Cousson, Benoit
2011-04-08 16:50 ` Paul Walmsley
2011-04-11 9:09 ` Tomi Valkeinen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1301467733.2333.83.camel@deskari \
--to=tomi.valkeinen@ti.com \
--cc=archit@ti.com \
--cc=b-cousson@ti.com \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paul@pwsan.com \
--cc=sumit.semwal@ti.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox