Hi Stephen,
On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Stephen Warren swarren@nvidia.com wrote:
Simon Glass wrote at Tuesday, February 28, 2012 10:46 AM:
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 3:41 PM, Stephen Warren swarren@nvidia.com wrote:
On 02/27/2012 01:52 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
A common requirement is to find the clock ID for a peripheral. This is the second cell of the 'clocks' property (the first being the phandle itself).
+int clock_decode_periph_id(const void *blob, int node)
- valid = clock_periph_id_isvalid(id);
clock_periph_id_isvalid() is not the correct function to use here; the code should be checking for invalid IDs in the CAR binding, not invalid IDs in the HW periph ID definition. They're different.
Just to be explicit, the function you need here would be:
int clkid_to_periphid(int clkid) { if (clk_id > 95) return -1; switch (clk_id) { case 1: case 2: case 7: case 10: case 20: case 30: case 35: case 49: case 56: case 74: case 77: case 78: case 79: case 80: case 81: case 82: case 83: case 91: case 95: return -1; default: return clkid; } }
Ick.
Why is 7 in there,
7 affects both the UART2 and VFIR clocks/blocks.
and did you miss 76?
No, that's the undocumented "la" clock.
Also U-Boot only goes up to 88 at present so should I change the first test to match?
No, clocks 89, 90, 92, 93, and 94 are defined in the binding, which matches the CLK_OUT_ENB registers in the Tegra CAR HW (albeit not the CLK_RST registers, since there are some differences between the two).
For both of your comments, since they aren't used in U-Boot, wouldn't it be more correct to flag these as errors also? We would have to update at least the clock.h header to support them.
Regards, Simon
-- nvpublic