[PATCH 2/3] ARM: OMAP: hwmod: revise deassert sequence
Omar Ramirez Luna
omar.luna at linaro.org
Mon Aug 20 21:15:16 EDT 2012
Hi Benoit,
On 20 August 2012 05:21, Benoit Cousson <b-cousson at ti.com> wrote:
> Hi Omar,
>
> On 08/03/2012 05:52 PM, Omar Ramirez Luna wrote:
>> On 3 August 2012 00:24, Vaibhav Hiremath <hvaibhav at ti.com> wrote:
>>> On 8/3/2012 3:50 AM, Omar Ramirez Luna wrote:
>>>> So in _enable:
>>>>
>>>> _enable_clocks(oh);
>>>> if (soc_ops.enable_module)
>>>> soc_ops.enable_module(oh);
>>>>
>>>> The enable_module part seems redundant to me, since the module should
>>>> be already enabled by the first call to _enable_clocks.
>>>
>>> Yes they do same thing, I believe the plan is to get rid of all clock
>>> leaf-nodes in the near future, and let hwmod handle module
>>> enable/disable part.
>>
>> If this is the case then an enable_module call is needed in my patch
>> for when these changes are made. The original works fine but only
>> because currently clock framework does what enable_module is doing.
>
> Yes, that's the case, but I plan to remove most of the leaf clocks ASAP,
> so we cannot rely on that.
>
>> Please let me know if you want me to resend with this change.
>
> Yes, could you please repost with that change?
Not a problem.
> It will be good as well that you remove the leaf clock and use the
> parent clock of current leaf as the main_clock. In that case it will
> ensure that this is the hwmod fmwk that does enable the modulemode and
> not the clock fmwk.
Ok, let me try that.
Thanks for the comments,
Omar
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list