Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hello Lokesh, Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla: > Locking sequence for all the dplls is same. > In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly > for each dpll. Instead have a generic function > for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function. > > This is derived from OMAP4 boards. > > Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla > --- > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 + > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++ > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222 > +- > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 + > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68 > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 + > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 + > 7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c Acked-by: Heiko Schocher Tested on 3 am335x boards (no need anymore to set mpu_pll twice on this boards :-), so: Tested-by: Heiko Schocher bye, Heiko -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hello Lokesh, Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla: > Locking sequence for all the dplls is same. > In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly > for each dpll. Instead have a generic function > for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function. > > This is derived from OMAP4 boards. > > Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla > --- > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 + > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++ > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222 > +- > arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 + > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68 > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 + > arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 + > 7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c Acked-by: Heiko Schocher Tested on 3 am335x boards so: Tested-by: Heiko Schocher bye, Heiko -- DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 11:09:41AM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote:
> Hi Heiko,
> On Tuesday 25 June 2013 10:24 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >Hello Lokesh,
> >
> >Am 25.06.2013 05:48, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> >>Hi Heiko,
> >>On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:42 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
> >>>Hello Lokesh,
> >>>
> >>>Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
> In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
> for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
> for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
>
> This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
> ---
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222
> +-
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
> 7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>
> >>>[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..a7f1d83
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
> >>>[...]
> +static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
> + const struct dpll_params *params)
> +{
> >>>
> >>>Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
> >>>
> >>>[U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
> >>>http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
> >>>
> >>>which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
> >>>from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
> >>>so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
> >>>static code ...
> >>Yes I saw that patch. No need to make this non-static.
> >>Please have your own struct "const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu"
> >>and update your values accordingly.
> >
> >Hmm.. maybe I miss something here. You call setup_dplls()
> >in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c using &dpll_mpu defined
> >in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c ... so how to
> >make here a board specific struct?
> >
> >The MPUCLK is configurable through the define CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK
> >which is good, but I have on this board a PMIC, which in board SPL
> >code change MPU and core voltage ... and after that I change
> >the MPU clock again ...
> Ohk.
> Can't we scale the voltages before calling setup_dplls()
> (Why do you want to configure the MPU clocks twice?
> I don't know much about your board, so I am just asking..:) )
> What I meant is something like below:
> void __weak scale_vcores(void)
> {}
>
> void prcm_init()
> {
> enable_basic_clocks();
> scale_vcores();
> setup_dplls();
> }
Keep in mind the OPP50 advisory (errata 1.0.24) as well. The first
fix/work-around for this I've seen drops us down to start with, and then
raises things up.
--
Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hello Lokesh,
Am 25.06.2013 10:17, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> Hi Heiko,
> On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:35 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> Hello Lokesh,
>>
>> Am 25.06.2013 07:39, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
>>> Hi Heiko,
>>> On Tuesday 25 June 2013 10:24 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 25.06.2013 05:48, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> Hi Heiko,
> On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:42 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> Hello Lokesh,
>>
>> Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
>>> Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
>>> In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
>>> for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
>>> for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
>>>
>>> This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222
>>> +-
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
>>> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
>>> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
>>> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
>>> 7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>>
>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000..a7f1d83
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
>> [...]
>>> +static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
>>> + const struct dpll_params *params)
>>> +{
>>
>> Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
>>
>> [U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
>>
>> which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
>> from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
>> so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
>> static code ...
> Yes I saw that patch. No need to make this non-static.
> Please have your own struct "const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu"
> and update your values accordingly.
Hmm.. maybe I miss something here. You call setup_dplls()
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c using &dpll_mpu defined
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c ... so how to
make here a board specific struct?
The MPUCLK is configurable through the define CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK
which is good, but I have on this board a PMIC, which in board SPL
code change MPU and core voltage ... and after that I change
the MPU clock again ...
>>> Ohk.
>>> Can't we scale the voltages before calling setup_dplls()
>>> (Why do you want to configure the MPU clocks twice?
>>
>> I speak with the customer ...
It seems, we can make this static, no need for
doing this dynamically ... I try it ...
>>> I don't know much about your board, so I am just asking..:) )
>>> What I meant is something like below:
>>> void __weak scale_vcores(void)
>>> {}
>>>
>>> void prcm_init()
>>> {
>>> enable_basic_clocks();
>>> scale_vcores();
>>> setup_dplls();
>>> }
>>>
>>> have your own scale_vcores in your board file.
>>> and for dpll_mpu have something like this:
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_
>>> const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
>>> M, N, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
>>> #else
>>> const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
>>> CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK, OSC-1, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
>>> #endif
>>
>> No, that is not good. We should prevent such board specific
>> defines in common code. I think this define is not necessary,
>> as, if we have a scale_vcore() function, I can set
>> CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK to the end value ! I try this out! Thanks!
> My idea here is to populate data according to the board.
> Its good if you use the same value.
>>
>>> I hope this should be possible on your board.
>>> I am telling this because it will be easy for me during my next cleanup
>>> during
>>> which I planned to combine omap-common and am33xx code..:)
>>
>> Ok, i try it ...
>>
>>> This is the exactly what is done for omap( program voltages and then
>>> setup dplls)
>>> You can refer to arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/clocks-common.c
>>> prcm_init() function.
>>>
>>> Please correct me if I am wrong..
>>
>> Yes, that looks good. Hmm... have we access to an pmic connected
>> over i2c at this time?
> you can do an i2c_init() here.
> Thanks and regards,
> Lokesh
bye,
Heiko
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
__
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hi Heiko,
On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:35 PM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 25.06.2013 07:39, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
Hi Heiko,
On Tuesday 25 June 2013 10:24 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 25.06.2013 05:48, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
Hi Heiko,
On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:42 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222
+-
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
[...]
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..a7f1d83
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
[...]
+static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
+ const struct dpll_params *params)
+{
Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
[U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
static code ...
Yes I saw that patch. No need to make this non-static.
Please have your own struct "const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu"
and update your values accordingly.
Hmm.. maybe I miss something here. You call setup_dplls()
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c using &dpll_mpu defined
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c ... so how to
make here a board specific struct?
The MPUCLK is configurable through the define CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK
which is good, but I have on this board a PMIC, which in board SPL
code change MPU and core voltage ... and after that I change
the MPU clock again ...
Ohk.
Can't we scale the voltages before calling setup_dplls()
(Why do you want to configure the MPU clocks twice?
I speak with the customer ...
I don't know much about your board, so I am just asking..:) )
What I meant is something like below:
void __weak scale_vcores(void)
{}
void prcm_init()
{
enable_basic_clocks();
scale_vcores();
setup_dplls();
}
have your own scale_vcores in your board file.
and for dpll_mpu have something like this:
#ifdef CONFIG_
const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
M, N, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
#else
const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK, OSC-1, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
#endif
No, that is not good. We should prevent such board specific
defines in common code. I think this define is not necessary,
as, if we have a scale_vcore() function, I can set
CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK to the end value ! I try this out! Thanks!
My idea here is to populate data according to the board.
Its good if you use the same value.
I hope this should be possible on your board.
I am telling this because it will be easy for me during my next cleanup
during
which I planned to combine omap-common and am33xx code..:)
Ok, i try it ...
This is the exactly what is done for omap( program voltages and then
setup dplls)
You can refer to arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/clocks-common.c
prcm_init() function.
Please correct me if I am wrong..
Yes, that looks good. Hmm... have we access to an pmic connected
over i2c at this time?
you can do an i2c_init() here.
Thanks and regards,
Lokesh
bye,
Heiko
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hello Lokesh,
Am 25.06.2013 07:39, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> Hi Heiko,
> On Tuesday 25 June 2013 10:24 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> Hello Lokesh,
>>
>> Am 25.06.2013 05:48, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
>>> Hi Heiko,
>>> On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:42 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
> In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
> for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
> for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
>
> This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
> ---
>arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
>arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
>arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222
> +-
>arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
>arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
>arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
>arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
>7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
>create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>
[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..a7f1d83
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
[...]
> +static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
> + const struct dpll_params *params)
> +{
Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
[U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
static code ...
>>> Yes I saw that patch. No need to make this non-static.
>>> Please have your own struct "const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu"
>>> and update your values accordingly.
>>
>> Hmm.. maybe I miss something here. You call setup_dplls()
>> in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c using &dpll_mpu defined
>> in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c ... so how to
>> make here a board specific struct?
>>
>> The MPUCLK is configurable through the define CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK
>> which is good, but I have on this board a PMIC, which in board SPL
>> code change MPU and core voltage ... and after that I change
>> the MPU clock again ...
> Ohk.
> Can't we scale the voltages before calling setup_dplls()
> (Why do you want to configure the MPU clocks twice?
I speak with the customer ...
> I don't know much about your board, so I am just asking..:) )
> What I meant is something like below:
> void __weak scale_vcores(void)
> {}
>
> void prcm_init()
> {
> enable_basic_clocks();
> scale_vcores();
> setup_dplls();
> }
>
> have your own scale_vcores in your board file.
> and for dpll_mpu have something like this:
> #ifdef CONFIG_
> const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
> M, N, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
> #else
> const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
> CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK, OSC-1, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
> #endif
No, that is not good. We should prevent such board specific
defines in common code. I think this define is not necessary,
as, if we have a scale_vcore() function, I can set
CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK to the end value ! I try this out! Thanks!
> I hope this should be possible on your board.
> I am telling this because it will be easy for me during my next cleanup
> during
> which I planned to combine omap-common and am33xx code..:)
Ok, i try it ...
> This is the exactly what is done for omap( program voltages and then
> setup dplls)
> You can refer to arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/clocks-common.c
> prcm_init() function.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong..
Yes, that looks good. Hmm... have we access to an pmic connected
over i2c at this time?
bye,
Heiko
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hi Heiko,
On Tuesday 25 June 2013 10:24 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 25.06.2013 05:48, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
Hi Heiko,
On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:42 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222
+-
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
[...]
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..a7f1d83
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
[...]
+static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
+ const struct dpll_params *params)
+{
Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
[U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
static code ...
Yes I saw that patch. No need to make this non-static.
Please have your own struct "const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu"
and update your values accordingly.
Hmm.. maybe I miss something here. You call setup_dplls()
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c using &dpll_mpu defined
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c ... so how to
make here a board specific struct?
The MPUCLK is configurable through the define CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK
which is good, but I have on this board a PMIC, which in board SPL
code change MPU and core voltage ... and after that I change
the MPU clock again ...
Ohk.
Can't we scale the voltages before calling setup_dplls()
(Why do you want to configure the MPU clocks twice?
I don't know much about your board, so I am just asking..:) )
What I meant is something like below:
void __weak scale_vcores(void)
{}
void prcm_init()
{
enable_basic_clocks();
scale_vcores();
setup_dplls();
}
have your own scale_vcores in your board file.
and for dpll_mpu have something like this:
#ifdef CONFIG_
const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
M, N, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
#else
const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu = {
CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK, OSC-1, 1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
#endif
I hope this should be possible on your board.
I am telling this because it will be easy for me during my next cleanup
during
which I planned to combine omap-common and am33xx code..:)
This is the exactly what is done for omap( program voltages and then
setup dplls)
You can refer to arch/arm/cpu/armv7/omap-common/clocks-common.c
prcm_init() function.
Please correct me if I am wrong..
Thanks and regards,
Lokesh
bye,
Heiko
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hello Lokesh,
Am 25.06.2013 05:48, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> Hi Heiko,
> On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:42 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
>> Hello Lokesh,
>>
>> Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
>>> Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
>>> In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
>>> for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
>>> for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
>>>
>>> This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
>>> ---
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222
>>> +-
>>> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
>>> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
>>> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
>>> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
>>> 7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
>>> create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>>
>> [...]
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 000..a7f1d83
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
>> [...]
>>> +static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
>>> + const struct dpll_params *params)
>>> +{
>>
>> Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
>>
>> [U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
>>
>> which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
>> from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
>> so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
>> static code ...
> Yes I saw that patch. No need to make this non-static.
> Please have your own struct "const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu"
> and update your values accordingly.
Hmm.. maybe I miss something here. You call setup_dplls()
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c using &dpll_mpu defined
in arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c ... so how to
make here a board specific struct?
The MPUCLK is configurable through the define CONFIG_SYS_MPUCLK
which is good, but I have on this board a PMIC, which in board SPL
code change MPU and core voltage ... and after that I change
the MPU clock again ...
bye,
Heiko
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hi Heiko,
On Tuesday 25 June 2013 12:42 AM, Heiko Schocher wrote:
Hello Lokesh,
Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222 +-
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
[...]
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..a7f1d83
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
[...]
+static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
+ const struct dpll_params *params)
+{
Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
[U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
static code ...
Yes I saw that patch. No need to make this non-static.
Please have your own struct "const struct dpll_params dpll_mpu"
and update your values accordingly.
Thanks and regards,
Lokesh
[...]
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
index 9c4d0b4..e878b25 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
@@ -26,56 +26,53 @@
#define PRCM_FORCE_WAKEUP 0x2
#define PRCM_FUNCTL 0x0
-#define PRCM_EMIF_CLK_ACTIVITY BIT(2)
-#define PRCM_L3_GCLK_ACTIVITY BIT(4)
-
-#define PLL_BYPASS_MODE0x4
-#define ST_MN_BYPASS 0x0100
-#define ST_DPLL_CLK0x0001
-#define CLK_SEL_MASK 0x7
-#define CLK_DIV_MASK 0x1f
-#define CLK_DIV2_MASK 0x7f
-#define CLK_SEL_SHIFT 0x8
-#define CLK_MODE_SEL 0x7
-#define CLK_MODE_MASK 0xfff8
-#define CLK_DIV_SEL0xFFE0
#define CPGMAC0_IDLE 0x3
-#define DPLL_CLKDCOLDO_GATE_CTRL0x300
-
#define OSC (V_OSCK/100)
and could we move this define then to
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h
too?
Thnaks!
bye,
Heiko
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Hello Lokesh,
Am 24.06.2013 15:15, schrieb Lokesh Vutla:
> Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
> In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
> for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
> for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
>
> This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
>
> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
> ---
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222
> +-
> arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
> arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
> 7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
>
[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000..a7f1d83
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
[...]
> +static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
> + const struct dpll_params *params)
> +{
Could we have this function not only static? I posted a patch:
[U-Boot] arm, am335x: make mpu pll config configurable
http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/248509/
which uses mpu_pll_config() for switching mpu pll clock
from board code ... you delete this function later in this patch,
so I think, I can switch to do_setup_pll() ... if this is not
static code ...
[...]
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
> b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
> index 9c4d0b4..e878b25 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c
> @@ -26,56 +26,53 @@
> #define PRCM_FORCE_WAKEUP0x2
> #define PRCM_FUNCTL 0x0
>
> -#define PRCM_EMIF_CLK_ACTIVITY BIT(2)
> -#define PRCM_L3_GCLK_ACTIVITYBIT(4)
> -
> -#define PLL_BYPASS_MODE 0x4
> -#define ST_MN_BYPASS 0x0100
> -#define ST_DPLL_CLK 0x0001
> -#define CLK_SEL_MASK 0x7
> -#define CLK_DIV_MASK 0x1f
> -#define CLK_DIV2_MASK0x7f
> -#define CLK_SEL_SHIFT0x8
> -#define CLK_MODE_SEL 0x7
> -#define CLK_MODE_MASK0xfff8
> -#define CLK_DIV_SEL 0xFFE0
> #define CPGMAC0_IDLE 0x3
> -#define DPLL_CLKDCOLDO_GATE_CTRL0x300
> -
> #define OSC (V_OSCK/100)
and could we move this define then to
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h
too?
Thnaks!
bye,
Heiko
--
DENX Software Engineering GmbH, MD: Wolfgang Denk & Detlev Zundel
HRB 165235 Munich, Office: Kirchenstr.5, D-82194 Groebenzell, Germany
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/4] ARM: AM33xx: Cleanup dplls data
Locking sequence for all the dplls is same.
In the current code same sequence is done repeatedly
for each dpll. Instead have a generic function
for locking dplls and pass dpll data to that function.
This is derived from OMAP4 boards.
Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla
---
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile |1 +
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c| 116 ++
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock_am33xx.c | 222 +-
arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/emif4.c|4 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/clock.h | 68
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/ddr_defs.h |2 +
arch/arm/include/asm/arch-am33xx/sys_proto.h |1 +
7 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 182 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile
index c97e30d..f4ccd2a 100644
--- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/Makefile
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ LIB = $(obj)lib$(SOC).o
COBJS-$(CONFIG_AM33XX) += clock_am33xx.o
COBJS-$(CONFIG_TI814X) += clock_ti814x.o
+COBJS-$(CONFIG_AM33XX) += clock.o
COBJS += sys_info.o
COBJS += mem.o
COBJS += ddr.o
diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
new file mode 100644
index 000..a7f1d83
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv7/am33xx/clock.c
@@ -0,0 +1,116 @@
+/*
+ * clock.c
+ *
+ * Clock initialization for AM33XX boards.
+ * Derived from OMAP4 boards
+ *
+ * Copyright (C) 2013, Texas Instruments, Incorporated - http://www.ti.com/
+ *
+ * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
+ * modify it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as
+ * published by the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of
+ * the License, or (at your option) any later version.
+ *
+ * This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
+ * but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
+ * MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR /PURPOSE. See the
+ * GNU General Public License for more details.
+ */
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+#include
+
+static void setup_post_dividers(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
+const struct dpll_params *params)
+{
+ /* Setup post-dividers */
+ if (params->m2 >= 0)
+ writel(params->m2, dpll_regs->cm_div_m2_dpll);
+ if (params->m3 >= 0)
+ writel(params->m3, dpll_regs->cm_div_m3_dpll);
+ if (params->m4 >= 0)
+ writel(params->m4, dpll_regs->cm_div_m4_dpll);
+ if (params->m5 >= 0)
+ writel(params->m5, dpll_regs->cm_div_m5_dpll);
+ if (params->m6 >= 0)
+ writel(params->m6, dpll_regs->cm_div_m6_dpll);
+}
+
+static inline void do_lock_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs)
+{
+ clrsetbits_le32(dpll_regs->cm_clkmode_dpll,
+ CM_CLKMODE_DPLL_DPLL_EN_MASK,
+ DPLL_EN_LOCK << CM_CLKMODE_DPLL_EN_SHIFT);
+}
+
+static inline void wait_for_lock(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs)
+{
+ if (!wait_on_value(ST_DPLL_CLK_MASK, ST_DPLL_CLK_MASK,
+ (void *)dpll_regs->cm_idlest_dpll, LDELAY)) {
+ printf("DPLL locking failed for 0x%x\n",
+ dpll_regs->cm_clkmode_dpll);
+ hang();
+ }
+}
+
+static inline void do_bypass_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs)
+{
+ clrsetbits_le32(dpll_regs->cm_clkmode_dpll,
+ CM_CLKMODE_DPLL_DPLL_EN_MASK,
+ DPLL_EN_MN_BYPASS << CM_CLKMODE_DPLL_EN_SHIFT);
+}
+
+static inline void wait_for_bypass(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs)
+{
+ if (!wait_on_value(ST_DPLL_CLK_MASK, 0,
+ (void *)dpll_regs->cm_idlest_dpll, LDELAY)) {
+ printf("Bypassing DPLL failed 0x%x\n",
+ dpll_regs->cm_clkmode_dpll);
+ }
+}
+
+static void bypass_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs)
+{
+ do_bypass_dpll(dpll_regs);
+ wait_for_bypass(dpll_regs);
+}
+
+static void do_setup_dpll(const struct dpll_regs *dpll_regs,
+ const struct dpll_params *params)
+{
+ u32 temp;
+
+ if (!params)
+ return;
+
+ temp = readl(dpll_regs->cm_clksel_dpll);
+
+ bypass_dpll(dpll_regs);
+
+ /* Set M & N */
+ temp &= ~CM_CLKSEL_DPLL_M_MASK;
+ temp |= (params->m << CM_CLKSEL_DPLL_M_SHIFT) & CM_CLKSEL_DPLL_M_MASK;
+
+ temp &= ~CM_CLKSEL_DPLL_N_MASK;
+ temp |= (params->n << CM_CLKSEL_DPLL_N_SHIFT) & CM_CLKSEL_DPLL_N_MASK;
+
+ writel(temp, dpll_regs->cm_clksel_dpll);
+
+ setup_post_dividers(dpll_regs, params);
+
+ /* Wait till the DPLL locks */
+ do_lock_dpll(dpll_regs);
+ wait_for_lock(dpll_regs);
+}
+
+void setup_dplls(void)
+{
+ do_setup_dpll(&dpll_core_regs, &dpll_core);
+ do_setup_dpll(&dpll_m
