From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Baruch Siach Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 12:25:30 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mx25: add platform support for imxfb Message-Id: <20100210122530.GD29489@jasper.tkos.co.il> List-Id: References: <63f40f35fe8cdea681d8341af36a4c539086f7ef.1265786237.git.baruch@tkos.co.il> <20100210075315.GB10185@pengutronix.de> <20100210083331.GB29489@jasper.tkos.co.il> In-Reply-To: <20100210083331.GB29489@jasper.tkos.co.il> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hi Uwe, On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:33:31AM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K=F6nig wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 09:25:19AM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > > > @@ -233,6 +242,9 @@ int __init mx25_clocks_init(void) > > > __raw_writel((0xf << 16) | (3 << 26), CRM_BASE + CCM_CGCR1); > > > __raw_writel((1 << 5), CRM_BASE + CCM_CGCR2); > > > =20 > > > + /* Clock source for lcdc is upll */ > > > + __raw_writel(__raw_readl(CRM_BASE+0x64) | (1 << 7), CRM_BASE + 0x64= ); > > > + > > Note I didn't look in the hardware manual, but I wonder if that should > > better go in the enable routine for lcdc? >=20 > OK. I'll do it there. Oops. I now see that the mx25 DEFINE_CLOCK() macro doesn't allow you curren= tly=20 to set an arbitrary .enable routine (following the mx27/mx31/mx35 clock=20 implementation). So this gets a little tricky, and I'm not sure it worth th= e=20 trouble. What do you think? baruch --=20 ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =3D}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------= { - baruch@tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il - From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: baruch@tkos.co.il (Baruch Siach) Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:25:30 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] mx25: add platform support for imxfb In-Reply-To: <20100210083331.GB29489@jasper.tkos.co.il> References: <63f40f35fe8cdea681d8341af36a4c539086f7ef.1265786237.git.baruch@tkos.co.il> <20100210075315.GB10185@pengutronix.de> <20100210083331.GB29489@jasper.tkos.co.il> Message-ID: <20100210122530.GD29489@jasper.tkos.co.il> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Hi Uwe, On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 10:33:31AM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 08:53:15AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 09:25:19AM +0200, Baruch Siach wrote: > > > @@ -233,6 +242,9 @@ int __init mx25_clocks_init(void) > > > __raw_writel((0xf << 16) | (3 << 26), CRM_BASE + CCM_CGCR1); > > > __raw_writel((1 << 5), CRM_BASE + CCM_CGCR2); > > > > > > + /* Clock source for lcdc is upll */ > > > + __raw_writel(__raw_readl(CRM_BASE+0x64) | (1 << 7), CRM_BASE + 0x64); > > > + > > Note I didn't look in the hardware manual, but I wonder if that should > > better go in the enable routine for lcdc? > > OK. I'll do it there. Oops. I now see that the mx25 DEFINE_CLOCK() macro doesn't allow you currently to set an arbitrary .enable routine (following the mx27/mx31/mx35 clock implementation). So this gets a little tricky, and I'm not sure it worth the trouble. What do you think? baruch -- ~. .~ Tk Open Systems =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{= - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -