[PATCH 2/2] ARM: OMAP2: Fix GPMC memory initialisation

Tony Lindgren tony at atomide.com
Mon Feb 4 14:47:25 EST 2013

* Jon Hunter <jon-hunter at ti.com> [130204 11:37]:
> On 02/04/2013 01:15 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Jon Hunter <jon-hunter at ti.com> [130204 10:49]:
> >> On 02/04/2013 11:45 AM, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> >>>
> >>> AFAIK SYSBOOT_n values reflect the boot time values of the actual SYSBOOT
> >>> pins, so using generic pinconf there makes sense. But this of course should
> >>> be checked.
> >>
> >> Not sure I am a fan of that idea. It is possible the pins could be
> >> re-used as GPIOs after reset. Given that the state at reset is latched
> >> in a register, it is best just to read the register directly.
> > 
> > Yes the physical SYSBOOT pins can be reused as GPIO, but that's are already
> > handled by the padconf and GPIO registers. This is a different register
> > showing the boot time pin values for some pins. So it makes sense to use
> > generic pinconf to make the pin values available to the client drivers
> > as needed.
> > 
> > The advantage doing it this way is that we don't need to export any omap
> > custom functions to the drivers from the SCM driver. This way we need zero
> > platform glue code, and can deal with it directly in the drivers in a
> > generic way. And all we need to do is just need to map the SoC specific
> > SYSBOOT pin register in the .dts files.
> I see what you are saying exporting the state in control_status register
> via the pinconf. That could work.
> > It may also make sense to export DEVICETYPE this way. At least early omaps
> > had the GP vs HS mode configured by pulls on some pins during the boot time.
> > So those bits too may reflect actual physical pins during the boot time
> > configured by the efuse settings?
> I *believe* that was only omap1.

Yeah but maybe the efuses just configure some pulls for selected pins for
later omaps?
> >>>>> Regarding omap_device, we should find a way to keep the dependencies
> >>>>> between drivers and the bus code down to minimum. So ideally things
> >>>>> like this would be only done using just the compatible flag. But the
> >>>>> pdata we cannot remove quite yet.
> >>>>
> >>>> Agree. However, there are several drivers today (gpio, dmtimer, mmc,
> >>>> serial, dss, etc), that make use of a function pointer to
> >>>> omap_pm_get_dev_context_loss_count() to determine when the peripheral's
> >>>> state has been lost. When booting with DT this function pointer is not
> >>>> populated and so with DT we currently have no way to determine this. I
> >>>> see this as a blocker to migrating completely to DT. Ideally we would
> >>>> find a way for RPM to handle this and remove the function pointer.
> >>>> However, right now we still need a generic way to pass this type of
> >>>> platform data to drivers.
> >>>
> >>> Yeah pinconf generic won't help us with the legacy boot.
> >>
> >> Right. I view all this sort of thing as system-level device information
> >> that some drivers may need. It does not seem that we have a good way to
> >> handle that at the moment. Any ideas?
> > 
> > I suggest just passing it in in pdata for now for the legacy boot. Then
> > I suggest we make what we can generic with pinconf in the long run.
> I don't see why we would want to export a function pointer to
> omap_pm_get_dev_context_loss_count() with pinconf. Have we got our wires
> crossed here?

Yes sorry, too many muxes here. I got this topic mixed up with the sysboot
pin topic :)

We really need to find a Linux generic API to query this. Sounds like it
should be part of runtime PM?



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list