Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-24 Thread Roger Quadros
On 23/02/15 23:38, Robert Abel wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: >> one more thing to note is that just specifying sync-clk-ps in DT is not >> enough for >> asynchronous devices. >> >> The driver doesn't set gpmc_t->sync_clk if "gpmc,sync-read" or >> "gpmc,sync-write

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-23 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Robert Abel [150223 13:42]: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: > > one more thing to note is that just specifying sync-clk-ps in DT is not > > enough for > > asynchronous devices. > > > > The driver doesn't set gpmc_t->sync_clk if "gpmc,sync-read" or > > "gpmc,sync-write"

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-23 Thread Robert Abel
On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 3:25 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: > one more thing to note is that just specifying sync-clk-ps in DT is not > enough for > asynchronous devices. > > The driver doesn't set gpmc_t->sync_clk if "gpmc,sync-read" or > "gpmc,sync-write" > was not set in the DT, which would be the

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-17 Thread Roger Quadros
On 17/02/15 16:06, Robert Abel wrote: > Hi Roger, > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: >> nobody stops the DT binding from specifying a large enough >> "gpmc,wait-monitoring-ns" value. >> The driver must use that to scale the GPMC_CLK if it doesn't fit in the >> GPMC_FCLK.

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-17 Thread Robert Abel
Hi Roger, On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 2:52 PM, Roger Quadros wrote: > nobody stops the DT binding from specifying a large enough > "gpmc,wait-monitoring-ns" value. > The driver must use that to scale the GPMC_CLK if it doesn't fit in the > GPMC_FCLK. > This feature can come separately though. So fo

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-17 Thread Roger Quadros
On 17/02/15 15:34, Robert Abel wrote: > Hi Roger, > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Roger Quadros > wrote: > > Can you use the following wording from TRM instead? > > as per am335x TRM (spruh73i.pdf), section 7.1.3.3.8.3.2 > > The WAITMONITORINGTIME is expr

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-17 Thread Robert Abel
Hi Roger, On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Roger Quadros wrote: > > Can you use the following wording from TRM instead? > > as per am335x TRM (spruh73i.pdf), section 7.1.3.3.8.3.2 > > The WAITMONITORINGTIME is expressed as a number of GPMC_CLK clock cycles, > even though the access is defined as

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-17 Thread Roger Quadros
Hi Robert, On 16/02/15 17:48, Robert ABEL wrote: > GPMC uses GPMCFCLKDIVIDER during synchronous as well as asynchronous accesses > in conjunction with WAITMONITORINGTIME. Thus, it's wrong to only program it > for > synchronous accesses. Remove the conditional. Can you use the following wording f

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-16 Thread Robert Abel
Hi Tony, On 16 Feb 2015 18:10, Tony Lindgren wrote: * Robert ABEL [150216 07:52]: GPMC uses GPMCFCLKDIVIDER during synchronous as well as asynchronous accesses in conjunction with WAITMONITORINGTIME. Thus, it's wrong to only program it for synchronous accesses. Remove the conditional. Do you

Re: [PATCH 2/4] ARM OMAP2+ GPMC: always program GPMCFCLKDIVIDER

2015-02-16 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Robert ABEL [150216 07:52]: > GPMC uses GPMCFCLKDIVIDER during synchronous as well as asynchronous accesses > in conjunction with WAITMONITORINGTIME. Thus, it's wrong to only program it > for > synchronous accesses. Remove the conditional. Do you have some test case that gets fixed by this? Or