From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Kevin Hilman Subject: Re: RFD: OMAP PRCM register access holding up PM branch submissions Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:55:01 -0700 Message-ID: <87mybq62yy.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> References: <87hc1y930c.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <20090312162804.GA7179@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <87bps67kby.fsf@deeprootsystems.com> <20090312170151.GB7854@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20090312172646.GL19229@atomide.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from ag-out-0708.google.com ([72.14.246.244]:50252 "EHLO ag-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752669AbZCLRzI (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 Mar 2009 13:55:08 -0400 Received: by ag-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id 26so1080379agb.10 for ; Thu, 12 Mar 2009 10:55:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20090312172646.GL19229@atomide.com> (Tony Lindgren's message of "Thu\, 12 Mar 2009 10\:26\:46 -0700") Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Tony Lindgren Cc: Russell King - ARM Linux , Paul Walmsley , linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk Tony Lindgren writes: > * Russell King - ARM Linux [090312 10:03]: >> On Thu, Mar 12, 2009 at 09:54:41AM -0700, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> > If you can share your opinions on the two register access approaches I >> > described, I will work on coordinating development in that direction. >> >> If I had a path forwards, then I would say so. At the moment, I have >> a vague idea about what I'd like to see, but it isn't in a workable >> state at the present time. >> >> I need to put further thought and time into coming up with a solution. >> For the time being, I am not going to apply the outstanding patches to >> put in place a solution which is totally confused about iomem and u32 >> types with lots of casts to make it work. Even one which passes u32 >> types to the IO accessors (which don't produce a warning but shouldn't >> be allowed in any case.) > > Well let's get the current omap clock patches in omap-clks3 merged. > It is already way closer to what we need than the current mainline code. > > Paul, maybe you can post that series to linux-omap for final review > and testing because of the mail/OOM issues Russell is having? I will post this series to linux-omap for final review. I don't think there are any major objections that should prevent this from going into this merge window. > Then we'll come up with a proper solution for the remaining patches > after this merge window. Agreed, this PRCM issue does not need to be resolved for this merge window. Kevin