On Wed, 2012-07-18 at 11:24 -0600, Paul Walmsley wrote: > On Wed, 18 Jul 2012, Tero Kristo wrote: > > > On Tue, 2012-07-17 at 03:11 -0500, Menon, Nishanth wrote: > > > > > OMAP4430_RM_ABE_AESS_CONTEXT? why not use LOSTMEM_AESSMEM ? ABE will > > > need to know when it lost context to be able to reload it's firmware, > > > no? > > > > It looks like current hwmod data doesn't support specific bits to be > > used for the context declaration, it is only specifying the register > > offset. Also, the same register is used by aess hwmod, so this will > > cause a conflict if I take the same register into use. > > > > This could be fixed by adding a field for the context bits, but I guess > > this should be commented upon by someone (Benoit / Paul) before I craft > > some sort of patch for that. > > If you need to add a u8 there to specify the bitshift, go ahead and do it. > u8 lostmem_bit, perhaps?
Mask might be better, as we have RFF / DFF bits, and also if mask is not defined, we can assume we want to check the whole register (current behavior.) I'll add this for next rev. -Tero -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
