From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tero Kristo Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 3/7] ARM: OMAP4: hwmod: flag hwmods/modules not supporting module level context status Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 12:00:42 +0300 Message-ID: <1342602042.4672.85.camel@sokoban> References: <1339428387-4800-1-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> <1339428387-4800-4-git-send-email-t-kristo@ti.com> Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:39896 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751704Ab2GRJAx (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2012 05:00:53 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: "Menon, Nishanth" Cc: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, khilman@ti.com, paul@pwsan.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 03:11 -0500, Menon, Nishanth wrote: > On Mon, Jun 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Tero Kristo wrote: > > On OMAP4 most modules/hwmods support module level context status. On > > OMAP3 and earlier, we relied on the power domain level context status. > > Identify all modules that don't support 'context_offs' by marking the > > offset as USHRT_MAX. Rest have a valid 'context_offs' populated in > > .prcm structure already. > > > > Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo > > --- > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c | 1 + > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c > > index 86fc513..828e7b8 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod_44xx_data.c > > @@ -208,6 +208,7 @@ static struct omap_hwmod omap44xx_l4_abe_hwmod = { > > .prcm = { > > .omap4 = { > > .clkctrl_offs = OMAP4_CM1_ABE_L4ABE_CLKCTRL_OFFSET, > > + .context_offs = USHRT_MAX, > > OMAP4430_RM_ABE_AESS_CONTEXT? why not use LOSTMEM_AESSMEM ? ABE will > need to know when it lost context to be able to reload it's firmware, > no? You are right, this should be possible to use. I just searched for modules which didn't have context_offs defined and added USHRT_MAX blindly there. -Tero