From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eduardo Valentin Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 11/11] ARM: DT: Add support to system control module for OMAP4 Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 15:49:58 +0300 Message-ID: <20120531124958.GD3673@besouro> References: <1337934361-1606-1-git-send-email-eduardo.valentin@ti.com> <1337934361-1606-12-git-send-email-eduardo.valentin@ti.com> <4FC49BA5.5050008@dev.rtsoft.ru> <4FC5DC9F.7080104@ti.com> <4FC5E2EE.8030504@dev.rtsoft.ru> <4FC5E7DE.2060905@ti.com> <4FC75EA8.6090406@dev.rtsoft.ru> Reply-To: eduardo.valentin@ti.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4FC75EA8.6090406@dev.rtsoft.ru> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: linux-pm-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Konstantin Baydarov Cc: balbi@ti.com, kishon@ti.com, amit.kucheria@linaro.org, linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org Hello, On Thu, May 31, 2012 at 04:06:00PM +0400, Konstantin Baydarov wrote: > Hi. > > On 05/30/2012 01:26 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote: > > On 5/30/2012 11:05 AM, Konstantin Baydarov wrote: > >> On 05/30/2012 12:38 PM, Cousson, Benoit wrote: > >>> On 5/29/2012 11:49 AM, Konstantin Baydarov wrote: > >>>> Hi, Eduardo. > >>>> > >>>> On 05/25/2012 12:26 PM, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > >>>>> This patch add device tree entries on OMAP4 based boards for > >>>>> System Control Module (SCM). > > > > ... > > > >>>> I believe that CPU-specific bandgap definition should be moved to > >>>> bard specific dts. > >>> > >>> Mmm, why, since it is CPU specific and not board specific. I has to > >>> be in the SoC file. > >> Speaking about omap4430 - omap4430 bandgap differs from omap4460, so > >> if omap4430 bandgap support will be added to omap-bandgap driver the > >> version of bandgap should specified in dts file. omap4.dtsi is a > >> common for omap4 boards, that is why I'm suggesting to move bandgap > >> description to probably board specific file. > > > > OK, I got your point, but in that case we could potentially define a omap4460.dtsi file. > > > >> Another solution is to > >> determine bandgap type in driver probe function, but in that case > >> "ti,omap4460-bandgap" in omap4.dtsi should be replaced to > >> "ti,omap4-bandgap". > > > > Yes, this is the best solution, but that assume that we can identify the control module version from the HW, which is not necessarily true :-( > > > > The IP_REVISION (offset = 0) value are unfortunately not documented, so we should read it to check if they are different from omap4430 and 4460. > > > > The bitfield layout in that register is: > > > > IP_REV_MAJOR: 8..10 > > IP_REV_CUSTOM: 6..7 > > IP_REV_MINOR: 0..5 > The value of CONTROL_GEN_CORE_REVISION register on my panda board(4430) is: > CONTROL_GEN_CORE_REVISION: 0x40000900 > CONTROL_GEN_CORE_HWINFO: 0x0 > > Eduardo, could you check CONTROL_GEN_CORE_REVISION on your 4460 board. 4460: [root@(none) ~]# omapconf read 0x4A002000 40000A00 [root@(none) ~]# omapconf read 0x4A002004 00000000 4470: [root@(none) ~]# omapconf read 0x4A002000 40000B00 [root@(none) ~]# omapconf read 0x4A002004 00000000 > > BR, > Konstantin Baydarov. > > > > > Regards, > > Benoit >