| Message ID | bbd72503f0e79cc6df4ba12db41b980d50415caf.1507634288.git.leonard.crestez@nxp.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ARM: imx: Enable cpuidle for i.MX6DL starting at 1.1 | expand |
Am Dienstag, den 10.10.2017, 14:20 +0300 schrieb Leonard Crestez: > Enable cpuidle support on i.MX6DL starting from > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1. Did you mean 1.0 here and in the subject? This would make sense AFAICS, and is also in line with what the code change does. > This also makes the code cleaner because 6q and 6dl actually have > different revision histories. > > > Signed-off-by: Bai Ping <ping.bai@nxp.com> > > Signed-off-by: Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@nxp.com> > --- > arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c > index 45801b2..ef0c949 100644 > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c > @@ -374,7 +374,8 @@ static void __init imx6q_init_late(void) > > * WAIT mode is broken on TO 1.0 and 1.1, so there is no point > > * to run cpuidle on them. > > */ > > - if (imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) > > + if ((cpu_is_imx6q() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) || > > + (cpu_is_imx6dl() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_0)) > > imx6q_cpuidle_init(); > > > if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_IMX6Q_CPUFREQ)) {
On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 13:44 +0200, Lucas Stach wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 10.10.2017, 14:20 +0300 schrieb Leonard Crestez: > > Enable cpuidle support on i.MX6DL starting from > > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1. > Did you mean 1.0 here and in the subject? This would make sense AFAICS, > and is also in line with what the code change does. No, I do mean "1.1" for 6dl. It's a bit confusing because the code uses > instead of >= for comparison. This patch results in imx6q_cpuidle_init getting called if (cpu_is_imx6dl() && imx_get_soc_revision() == IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1); without this patch it was skipped. > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c > > @@ -374,7 +374,8 @@ static void __init imx6q_init_late(void) > > > > > > * WAIT mode is broken on TO 1.0 and 1.1, so there is no point > > > * to run cpuidle on them. > > > */ > > > - if (imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) > > > + if ((cpu_is_imx6q() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) || > > > + (cpu_is_imx6dl() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_0)) > > > imx6q_cpuidle_init();
Am Dienstag, den 10.10.2017, 14:57 +0300 schrieb Leonard Crestez: > On Tue, 2017-10-10 at 13:44 +0200, Lucas Stach wrote: > > Am Dienstag, den 10.10.2017, 14:20 +0300 schrieb Leonard Crestez: > > > Enable cpuidle support on i.MX6DL starting from > > > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1. > > Did you mean 1.0 here and in the subject? This would make sense AFAICS, > > and is also in line with what the code change does. > > No, I do mean "1.1" for 6dl. It's a bit confusing because the code uses > > instead of >= for comparison. Uh, right. Given that I totally misread this on a quick glance, I would prefer this to be >= ,but that's more a matter of personal taste. > This patch results in imx6q_cpuidle_init getting called if > (cpu_is_imx6dl() && imx_get_soc_revision() == IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1); > without this patch it was skipped. > > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c > > > @@ -374,7 +374,8 @@ static void __init imx6q_init_late(void) > > > > > > > > * WAIT mode is broken on TO 1.0 and 1.1, so there is no point > > > > * to run cpuidle on them. > > > > */ This comment is now out of sync with the code below. > > > > - if (imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) > > > > + if ((cpu_is_imx6q() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) || > > > > + (cpu_is_imx6dl() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_0)) > > > > imx6q_cpuidle_init();
diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c index 45801b2..ef0c949 100644 --- a/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c +++ b/arch/arm/mach-imx/mach-imx6q.c @@ -374,7 +374,8 @@ static void __init imx6q_init_late(void) * WAIT mode is broken on TO 1.0 and 1.1, so there is no point * to run cpuidle on them. */ - if (imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) + if ((cpu_is_imx6q() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_1) || + (cpu_is_imx6dl() && imx_get_soc_revision() > IMX_CHIP_REVISION_1_0)) imx6q_cpuidle_init(); if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM_IMX6Q_CPUFREQ)) {