RE: On the APIs for Enabling and Disabling Wakeup capability.

["Cousson, Benoit" <b-cousson@ti.com>]

Hi Hema,

>From: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org
>
>Kevin,
>
>There is no errata in the USB which needs the Enable/Disable
>wakeup to be done
>Seperately. If it can be handled with omap_devie_enable/idle
>Apis it is sufficient.
>
>But there is a need of setting the Auto idle bit seperately as
>for the USBOTG there is a need to set the Autoidle only after
>configuring the smart idle. It is recommended in the TRM not
>set the auto idle and smart idle together.
>This I discussed with Partha he sent a mail to you.
>
>For setting autoidle there is an api at hwmod layer but not
>yet omap device layer.
>Is there a plan to add API at omap device layer for
>enabling/disabling the autoidle?

The whole issue with exposing all the low level stuff at driver level
is that the hwmod abstraction become less and less useful.
Drivers will start hacking with that for no good reason. And then we will start adding again some omap version specific hacks in the driver.

Could you provide the full errata description of that USB_OTG issue? Or at least that TRM part you are talking about.

Thanks,
Benoit

>Regards,
>Hema
>
>
>>
Texas Instruments France SA, 821 Avenue Jack Kilby, 06270 Villeneuve Loubet. 036 420 040 R.C.S Antibes. Capital de EUR 753.920

-----Original Message-----

>>From: Kevin Hilman [mailto:khilman@deeprootsystems.com]
>>Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 5:56 AM
>>To: Basak, Partha
>>Cc: paul@pwsan.com; Kalliguddi, Hema; Nayak, Rajendra;
>>linux-omap@vger.kernel.org
>>Subject: Re: On the APIs for Enabling and Disabling Wakeup capability.
>>
>>"Basak, Partha" <p-basak2@ti.com> writes:
>>
>>> I wanted to close on the introduction of two new OMAP device APIs
>>> omap_device_enable_wakeup () & omap_device_disable_wakeup() in
>>> omap_device layer.
>>>
>>> These APIs are potentially needed by the USB driver (via function
>>> pointers) to work around some USB erratum.
>>>
>>> Alternatively, can we call omap_hwmod_enable_wakeup() via function
>>> pointer?  Is it agreeable to call these from driver code (via
>>> function pointers)in some special cases such as to handle some
>>> errata?
>>
>>Hi Partha,
>>
>>First, we need to dig up the Errata details for that USB problem to
>>better understand the USB-specific issue.
>>
>>In addition, Paul and I discussed the option of automatically managing
>>the wakeup during the hwmod enable/idle, since there isn't really a
>>need to have the wakeup enabled when the hwmod is active.
>>
>>Do you see any disadvantages to that?  That would be much cleaner than
>>manually managing the wakeup feature per-driver.
>>
>>Kevin
>>--
>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
>