Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-03-02 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160302 11:41]: > I know there are some comments regarding other patches in > this patchset but this patch is unrelated and can be pulled > in separately. Any objections to this or should I just > resubmit this patch by itself? No objections from me at least. If something

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-03-02 Thread Franklin S Cooper Jr.
On 02/29/2016 05:20 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160229 15:12]: >> >> On 02/29/2016 04:55 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> * Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160229 14:31]: On 02/29/2016 04:04 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > Hmm but why are you also removing the pm_runtime calls? T

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-29 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160229 15:12]: > > > On 02/29/2016 04:55 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > * Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160229 14:31]: > >> On 02/29/2016 04:04 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > >>> Hmm but why are you also removing the pm_runtime calls? Those > >>> actually do take care of gating the

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-29 Thread Franklin S Cooper Jr.
On 02/29/2016 04:55 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160229 14:31]: >> On 02/29/2016 04:04 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: >>> Hmm but why are you also removing the pm_runtime calls? Those >>> actually do take care of gating the clocks via the interconnect >>> level code that is hwmo

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-29 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Franklin S Cooper Jr. [160229 14:31]: > On 02/29/2016 04:04 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > > Hmm but why are you also removing the pm_runtime calls? Those > > actually do take care of gating the clocks via the interconnect > > level code that is hwmod in this case. > I removed all PM runtime calls t

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-29 Thread Franklin S Cooper Jr.
Hi Tony, On 02/29/2016 04:04 PM, Tony Lindgren wrote: > * Franklin S Cooper Jr [160225 14:37]: >> The PWMSS local clock gating registers have no real purpose on OMAP ARM >> devices. These registers were left over registers from DSP IP where the >> PRCM doesn't exist. There is a silicon bug where

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-29 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Franklin S Cooper Jr [160225 14:37]: > The PWMSS local clock gating registers have no real purpose on OMAP ARM > devices. These registers were left over registers from DSP IP where the > PRCM doesn't exist. There is a silicon bug where gating and ungating clocks > don't function properly. TRMs w

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-26 Thread Tony Lindgren
* Sekhar Nori [160226 02:27]: > + Thierry, PWM subsystem maintainer. The driver changes need to be resent to Thierry please. Regards, Tony

Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-26 Thread Sekhar Nori
+ Thierry, PWM subsystem maintainer. On Friday 26 February 2016 04:06 AM, Franklin S Cooper Jr wrote: > The PWMSS local clock gating registers have no real purpose on OMAP ARM > devices. These registers were left over registers from DSP IP where the > PRCM doesn't exist. There is a silicon bug whe

[PATCH v3 1/5] pwms: pwm-ti*: Remove support for local clock gating

2016-02-25 Thread Franklin S Cooper Jr
The PWMSS local clock gating registers have no real purpose on OMAP ARM devices. These registers were left over registers from DSP IP where the PRCM doesn't exist. There is a silicon bug where gating and ungating clocks don't function properly. TRMs will be update to indicate that these registers s