Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:10:30 +0200 | From | Tero Kristo <> | Subject | Re: [BISECTED] OMAP: DSS: clk rate mismatch |
| |
On 01/28/2014 08:17 PM, Ivaylo Dimitrov wrote: > > > On 28.01.2014 10:48, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > >> I made a somewhat hacky quickfix for beagle. Applying that and the >> clk-divider from the link above makes things work for me. However, as I >> said, the issue with n900 might be different, but it'd be interesting to >> hear if it has any effect. >> >> Tomi >> > > Applying those 2 patches doesn't help, still get exactly the same warning. > > Find attached my clk_summary (with my hacky patch applied, otherwise I > cannot boot the device) > > Ivo
It looks like the omap36xx version of the omap96m_alwon_fck is modelled improperly in the dts files. I don't have access to omap36xx hardware myself, but give a try for the following patch:
From: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 11:03:46 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] ARM: dts: omap36xx: fix omap96m_alwon_fck
OMAP36xx has different hardware implementation for the omap96m_alwon_fck compared to other OMAP3 variants. Reflect this properly in the dts file.
Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@ti.com> --- arch/arm/boot/dts/omap36xx-clocks.dtsi | 9 +++++++++ 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap36xx-clocks.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap36xx-clocks.dtsi index 2fcf253..24ddf3f 100644 --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap36xx-clocks.dtsi +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/omap36xx-clocks.dtsi @@ -88,3 +88,12 @@ <&mcbsp4_ick>, <&uart4_fck>; }; }; + +&omap_96m_alwon_fck { + compatible = "ti,divider-clock"; + clocks = <&omap_192m_alwon_fck>; + ti,bit-shift = <12>; + ti,max-div = <2>; + reg = <0x0a40>; + ti,index-starts-at-one; +}; -- 1.7.9.5
| |