| Message ID | 1344423254-3475-3-git-send-email-rnayak@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com> writes: > The 4430 OPP table was being registered for all other OMAP4 variants > too, like 4460 and 4470 causing issues with cpufreq driver > enabled. 4460 and 4470 devices have different OPPs as compared to > 4430, and they should be populated seperately. As long as that > happens, let the OPP table registeration happen only on 4430 device. > > Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com> Thanks, adding to PM fixes for v3.6-rc (branch: for_3.6/fixes/pm) Kevin > --- > arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c > index 2293ba2..c95415d 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c > @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ int __init omap4_opp_init(void) > { > int r = -ENODEV; > > - if (!cpu_is_omap44xx()) > + if (!cpu_is_omap443x()) > return r; > > r = omap_init_opp_table(omap44xx_opp_def_list,
Hi Kevin, On Wednesday 08 August 2012 10:48 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: >> The 4430 OPP table was being registered for all other OMAP4 variants >> > too, like 4460 and 4470 causing issues with cpufreq driver >> > enabled. 4460 and 4470 devices have different OPPs as compared to >> > 4430, and they should be populated seperately. As long as that >> > happens, let the OPP table registeration happen only on 4430 device. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak<rnayak@ti.com> > Thanks, adding to PM fixes for v3.6-rc (branch: for_3.6/fixes/pm) I just posted a v2 of this series addressing the issues raised by Santosh on Patch 1/2. The problem with taking just $subject fix (or taking it before Patch 1/2) is that you would hit the issue fixed by the Patch 1/2 and cause a crash on non-4430 based OMAP4 devices with cpufreq enabled. regards, Rajendra
Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com> writes: > Hi Kevin, > > On Wednesday 08 August 2012 10:48 PM, Kevin Hilman wrote: >>> The 4430 OPP table was being registered for all other OMAP4 variants >>> > too, like 4460 and 4470 causing issues with cpufreq driver >>> > enabled. 4460 and 4470 devices have different OPPs as compared to >>> > 4430, and they should be populated seperately. As long as that >>> > happens, let the OPP table registeration happen only on 4430 device. >>> > >>> > Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak<rnayak@ti.com> >> Thanks, adding to PM fixes for v3.6-rc (branch: for_3.6/fixes/pm) > > I just posted a v2 of this series addressing the issues raised by > Santosh on Patch 1/2. The problem with taking just $subject fix (or > taking it before Patch 1/2) is that you would hit the issue fixed > by the Patch 1/2 and cause a crash on non-4430 based OMAP4 devices with > cpufreq enabled. OK, thanks for the warning. I'll be sure to keep them together. Kevin
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c index 2293ba2..c95415d 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ int __init omap4_opp_init(void) { int r = -ENODEV; - if (!cpu_is_omap44xx()) + if (!cpu_is_omap443x()) return r; r = omap_init_opp_table(omap44xx_opp_def_list,
The 4430 OPP table was being registered for all other OMAP4 variants too, like 4460 and 4470 causing issues with cpufreq driver enabled. 4460 and 4470 devices have different OPPs as compared to 4430, and they should be populated seperately. As long as that happens, let the OPP table registeration happen only on 4430 device. Signed-off-by: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com> --- arch/arm/mach-omap2/opp4xxx_data.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)