Hi,
On Mon, Jul 02, 2012 at 08:10:49PM +0300, Ruslan Bilovol wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On Mon, Jul 2, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Felipe Balbi <ba...@ti.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2012 at 08:36:21PM +0300, Ruslan Bilovol wrote:
> > > If the clocks are enabled and we want to enable them again
> > > omap4430_phy_set_clk disables them.
> > >
> > > Fix this - so now if we try to enable already enabled clocks
> > > it works correctly.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ruslan Bilovol <ruslan.bilo...@ti.com>
> > > ---
> > > arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_phy_internal.c | 2 +-
> > > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_phy_internal.c
> > > b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_phy_internal.c
> > > index 4c90477..0196683 100644
> > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_phy_internal.c
> > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/omap_phy_internal.c
> > > @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@ int omap4430_phy_set_clk(struct device *dev, int on)
> > > clk_enable(clk48m);
> > > clk_enable(clk32k);
> > > state = 1;
> > > - } else if (state) {
> > > + } else if (!on && state) {
> >
> > why don't you let clocks be enabled twice then ? That would cut down the
> > churn.
>
> Currently we have unbalanced call of this function.
> I meet first during musb initialization - it tries to disable the phy
> that leads to disabling already disabled clocks.
> Next goal is to use internal clocks counter and to throw static
> variable 'state'.don't even go that way... what you need is to fix the unbalanced calls instead of hacking around some generic API. -- balbi
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
