Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCHv4] clk: ppc-corenet: rename to ppc-qoriq and add CLK_OF_DECLARE support | From | Scott Wood <> | Date | Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:57:55 -0500 |
| |
On Sat, 2014-09-27 at 21:18 -0500, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Linuxppc-dev > > [mailto:linuxppc-dev-bounces+b29983=freescale.com@lists.ozlabs.org] On > > Behalf Of Mike Turquette > > Sent: Saturday, September 27, 2014 7:29 AM > > To: Wood Scott-B07421 > > Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Lu Jingchang-B35083 > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv4] clk: ppc-corenet: rename to ppc-qoriq and add > > CLK_OF_DECLARE support > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2014-09-25 15:56:20) > > > On Thu, 2014-09-25 at 15:54 -0700, Mike Turquette wrote: > > > > Quoting Scott Wood (2014-09-25 13:08:00) > > > > > Well, like I said, I'd rather see the CLK_OF_DECLARE stuff be made > > > > > to work on PPC rather than have the driver carry around two > > > > > binding methods. > > > > > > > > I guess that is an existing problem, and not related directly to > > > > this patch? This patch is essentially just renames (though the > > > > V1.0/V2.0 stuff seems weird). > > > > > > This patch is adding CLK_OF_DECLARE. > > > > I'm fine taking this patch but your comments are still unresolved. What do you > > think needs to be done to fix the problems that you see? > > > CLK_OF_DECLARE is totally worked on PPC. I will do it in a separate patch. > Regarding V1.0 and V2.0, it is not wired just same for now. But we are not sure if it is same for v3.0 in the future. > > Besides updating drivers/cpufreq/Kconfig.powerpc, there is one more thing I am not comfortable with: > This patch uses " fixed-clock" as sysclk's compatible string, while on PPC we treated it as " fsl,qoriq-sysclk-[1-2].0". > That's inconsistent on both ARM and PPC platforms, neither did on bindings.
fsl,qoriq-sysclk-XXX is the way it is because of compatibility with the fixups in existing U-Boots. It shouldn't be used as a model.
That said, I don't think you really mean "this patch", as it doesn't contain the device tree updates, and "fixed-clock" does not appear.
-Scott
| |