[PATCH] AT91: SAM9G45 - add a separate clock entry for every single TC block
Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD
plagnioj at jcrosoft.com
Wed Sep 8 05:50:58 EDT 2010
On 11:00 Wed 08 Sep , Nicolas Ferre wrote:
> Le 07/09/2010 21:42, avictor.za at gmail.com :
> > hi,
> >
> >> +/* One additional fake clock for second TC block */
> >> +static struct clk tcb1_clk = {
> >> + .name = "tcb1_clk",
> >> + .pmc_mask = 0,
> >> + .type = CLK_TYPE_PERIPHERAL,
> >> + .parent = &tcb0_clk,
> >> +};
> >> +
> >
> > Looking at this again... since type is CLK_TYPE_PERIPHERAL, when you
> > call clk_register() the "parent" is changed to the master clock.
> >
> > Which means, then later you call clk_enable() the "pmc_mask" is still
> > 0, so 0 gets written (in pmc_periph_mode) to AT91_PMC_PCER. So the
> > TCB clock won't be enabled.
> >
> > Or am I missing something?
>
> You are absolutely right!
>
> What do you think about this modification of clk_register() function?
>
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/clock.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/clock.c
> @@ -501,7 +501,8 @@ postcore_initcall(at91_clk_debugfs_init);
> int __init clk_register(struct clk *clk)
> {
> if (clk_is_peripheral(clk)) {
> - clk->parent = &mck;
> + if (!clk->parent)
> + clk->parent = &mck;
> clk->mode = pmc_periph_mode;
> list_add_tail(&clk->node, &clocks);
> }
>
> It is a very little modification which implements what I had in mind
> while creating a kind of "child peripheral" clock.
so so
but until we switch to clkdev it will solve the issue
Acked-by: Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD <plagnioj at jcrosoft.com>
Best Regards,
J.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list