From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jon Hunter Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] OMAP4: Add missing clock divider for OCP_ABE_ICLK Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 15:57:57 -0500 Message-ID: <4E249E55.6010004@ti.com> References: <1310685865-3249-1-git-send-email-jon-hunter@ti.com> <4E204FFC.5080700@ti.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bear.ext.ti.com ([192.94.94.41]:35735 "EHLO bear.ext.ti.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750713Ab1GRU6A (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2011 16:58:00 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4E204FFC.5080700@ti.com> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Paul Walmsley Cc: linux-omap , b-cousson@ti.com On 7/15/2011 9:34, Jon Hunter wrote: > 2). The "ocp_abe_iclk" is an interface clock and is not a parent to any > other functional clock and therefore, is not driving any internal logic > in a peripheral which would have a direct impact of the speed of that > peripheral. However, there does appear to be another bug here in the > clock44xx_data.c as it shows that the "ocp_abe_iclk" is parent to the > "slimbus1_fck" which I believe is incorrect. According to the TRM, the > the ocp_abe_iclk is parent to the slimbus1_iclk. I can send another > patch for this. However, I will let Benoit chime in first. On further inspection of the clock44xx_data.c, it appears that all interface clocks are called xxx_fck and not xxx_ick. I will ask Benoit about this. However, this particular clock we are dealing with here is an interface clock. Cheers Jon