| Message ID | 5493B5CE.7010000@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Lokesh, On 19/12/14 07:21, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > Hi Roger, > On Thursday 18 December 2014 09:22 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: >> Fixing up Paul's email id. >> >> cheers, >> -roger >> >> On 18/12/14 17:49, Roger Quadros wrote: >>> There are quite a few hwmods that don't have sysconfig register and so >>> _find_mpu_rt_port(oh) will return NULL thus preventing ready state check >>> on those modules after the module is enabled. >>> >>> This can potentially cause a bus access error if the module is accessed >>> before the module is ready. >>> >>> Get rid of the redundant _find_mpu_rt_port() check from the _wait_target_ready() >>> funcion for all the SoCs. The following PRCM register access that checks the >>> module ready state has nothing to do with module's SYSCONFIG or mpu_rt_port. > Yes, makes sense. This patch looks good to me. > Tested this on AM437x-gp-evm. > > Tested-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com> Thanks. > > May be good idea to warn every time if enabling of module is failed? > Unrelated to this patch though. Yes, failing to be ready is serious enough for a warning. Care to send a separate patch for that? cheers, -roger -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Roger Quadros <rogerq@ti.com> [141219 01:08]: > Lokesh, > > On 19/12/14 07:21, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > > Hi Roger, > > On Thursday 18 December 2014 09:22 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: > >> Fixing up Paul's email id. > >> > >> cheers, > >> -roger > >> > >> On 18/12/14 17:49, Roger Quadros wrote: > >>> There are quite a few hwmods that don't have sysconfig register and so > >>> _find_mpu_rt_port(oh) will return NULL thus preventing ready state check > >>> on those modules after the module is enabled. > >>> > >>> This can potentially cause a bus access error if the module is accessed > >>> before the module is ready. > >>> > >>> Get rid of the redundant _find_mpu_rt_port() check from the _wait_target_ready() > >>> funcion for all the SoCs. The following PRCM register access that checks the > >>> module ready state has nothing to do with module's SYSCONFIG or mpu_rt_port. > > Yes, makes sense. This patch looks good to me. > > Tested this on AM437x-gp-evm. Roger, if the modules don't have sysconfig registers, care to check if we actually really need hwmod for those modules then? I know hwmod is managing runtime PM gate clocks for devices with clkctrl_offs. But if that's all we need hwmod for in the non-sysc cases, then it might make sense to manage the gate clocks in the clock framework directly instead for those devices. Of course that's more of a long term project, but at least we should be aware of the dependencies here :) > > May be good idea to warn every time if enabling of module is failed? > > Unrelated to this patch though. > > Yes, failing to be ready is serious enough for a warning. Care to send a separate patch for that? Yeah that sounds like a separate patch. Regards, Tony -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c index 4c6b7b2..db67b66 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_hwmod.c @@ -2243,7 +2243,7 @@ static int _enable(struct omap_hwmod *oh) if (soc_ops.disable_module) soc_ops.disable_module(oh); _disable_clocks(oh); - pr_debug("omap_hwmod: %s: _wait_target_ready: %d\n", + pr_warn("omap_hwmod: %s: _wait_target_ready failed : %d\n", oh->name, r); if (oh->clkdm)