Re: [RFC PATCH] AT91: manage clock by functionality instead of CPUs

["Ville Syrjälä" <syrjala@sci.fi>]

On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 11:56:55AM +0100, Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/clock.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/clock.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,25 @@
>  #define clk_is_sys(x)		((x)->type & CLK_TYPE_SYSTEM)
>  
>  
> +/*
> + * Chips have some kind of clocks : group them by functionality
> + */
> +#define cpu_has_utmi()		(  cpu_is_at91cap9() \
> +				|| cpu_is_at91sam9rl())
> +
> +#define cpu_has_800M_plla()	(cpu_is_at91sam9g20())
> +
> +#define cpu_has_pllb()		(!(cpu_is_at91sam9rl()))

Useless parentheses.

> +
> +#define cpu_has_upll()		(0)

Is this for some future chip?

> +
> +/* USB host HS & FS */
> +#define cpu_has_uhp()		(!cpu_is_at91sam9rl())
> +
> +/* USB device FS only */
> +#define cpu_has_udpfs()		(!(cpu_is_at91sam9rl()))

Useless parentheses.

> +
> +
>  static LIST_HEAD(clocks);
>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(clk_lock);
>  
> @@ -142,7 +161,7 @@ static struct clk utmi_clk = {
>  };
>  static struct clk uhpck = {
>  	.name		= "uhpck",
> -	.parent		= &pllb,
> +	/*.parent		= ... we choose parent at runtime */
>  	.mode		= pmc_sys_mode,
>  };
>  
> @@ -175,7 +194,12 @@ static struct clk __init *at91_css_to_cl
>  		case AT91_PMC_CSS_PLLA:
>  			return &plla;
>  		case AT91_PMC_CSS_PLLB:
> -			return &pllb;
> +			if (cpu_has_upll())
> +				/* CSS_PLLB == CSS_UPLL */
> +				return &utmi_clk;
> +			else
> +				if (cpu_has_pllb())
> +					return &pllb;

Put "else if" on one line?

-- 
Ville Syrjälä
syrjala@sci.fi
http://www.sci.fi/~syrjala/