All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: heiko@sntech.de (Heiko Stübner)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC 0/3] clk: dt: bindings for mux & divider clocks
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 00:31:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201306040031.02935.heiko@sntech.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1370281990-15090-1-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org>

Am Montag, 3. Juni 2013, 19:53:07 schrieb Mike Turquette:
> This series introduces binding definitions for common register-mapped
> clock multiplexor and divider IP blocks, and the corresponding setup
> functions once they are matched.  The bindings are close the struct
> definitions but please don't hold that against the binding: the struct
> definitions closely model the hardware.
> 
> The only missing basic clock type is the gate clock.  A binding for that
> was posted some time back and is similar in spirit to these[1].  I guess
> we'll need to decide whether register-level programming details belong
> in DT.  I believe they do since those details describe the hardware.
> 
> Note that there is still no generic clock driver that matches these
> basic types, but it would be trivial to write one.  Thoughts on that?
> Is it better for each of the basic clock types to be a driver that
> matches, or should there be one drivers/clk/clk-basic.c which matches
> all of the basic clock building blocks?  I like the latter for aesthetic
> purposes.
> 
> I am using this code while converting the OMAP4 clock data over to DT
> and some common boilerplate code can be factored out of several clock
> drivers if this is merged.

apart from the stuff pointed out in the replies to the patches this works 
really well on my upcoming Rockchip platform and saves quite a lot silly clock 
definitions whose only purpose is to hold the shift and width values.


So, for this series:

Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
Acked-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org,
	Mike Turquette
	<mturquette-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>,
	linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] clk: dt: bindings for mux & divider clocks
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 00:31:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201306040031.02935.heiko@sntech.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1370281990-15090-1-git-send-email-mturquette-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org>

Am Montag, 3. Juni 2013, 19:53:07 schrieb Mike Turquette:
> This series introduces binding definitions for common register-mapped
> clock multiplexor and divider IP blocks, and the corresponding setup
> functions once they are matched.  The bindings are close the struct
> definitions but please don't hold that against the binding: the struct
> definitions closely model the hardware.
> 
> The only missing basic clock type is the gate clock.  A binding for that
> was posted some time back and is similar in spirit to these[1].  I guess
> we'll need to decide whether register-level programming details belong
> in DT.  I believe they do since those details describe the hardware.
> 
> Note that there is still no generic clock driver that matches these
> basic types, but it would be trivial to write one.  Thoughts on that?
> Is it better for each of the basic clock types to be a driver that
> matches, or should there be one drivers/clk/clk-basic.c which matches
> all of the basic clock building blocks?  I like the latter for aesthetic
> purposes.
> 
> I am using this code while converting the OMAP4 clock data over to DT
> and some common boilerplate code can be factored out of several clock
> drivers if this is merged.

apart from the stuff pointed out in the replies to the patches this works 
really well on my upcoming Rockchip platform and saves quite a lot silly clock 
definitions whose only purpose is to hold the shift and width values.


So, for this series:

Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>
Acked-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko-4mtYJXux2i+zQB+pC5nmwQ@public.gmane.org>

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Heiko Stübner" <heiko@sntech.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 0/3] clk: dt: bindings for mux & divider clocks
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 00:31:02 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201306040031.02935.heiko@sntech.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1370281990-15090-1-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org>

Am Montag, 3. Juni 2013, 19:53:07 schrieb Mike Turquette:
> This series introduces binding definitions for common register-mapped
> clock multiplexor and divider IP blocks, and the corresponding setup
> functions once they are matched.  The bindings are close the struct
> definitions but please don't hold that against the binding: the struct
> definitions closely model the hardware.
> 
> The only missing basic clock type is the gate clock.  A binding for that
> was posted some time back and is similar in spirit to these[1].  I guess
> we'll need to decide whether register-level programming details belong
> in DT.  I believe they do since those details describe the hardware.
> 
> Note that there is still no generic clock driver that matches these
> basic types, but it would be trivial to write one.  Thoughts on that?
> Is it better for each of the basic clock types to be a driver that
> matches, or should there be one drivers/clk/clk-basic.c which matches
> all of the basic clock building blocks?  I like the latter for aesthetic
> purposes.
> 
> I am using this code while converting the OMAP4 clock data over to DT
> and some common boilerplate code can be factored out of several clock
> drivers if this is merged.

apart from the stuff pointed out in the replies to the patches this works 
really well on my upcoming Rockchip platform and saves quite a lot silly clock 
definitions whose only purpose is to hold the shift and width values.


So, for this series:

Tested-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>
Acked-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@sntech.de>


  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-06-03 22:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-03 17:53 [PATCH RFC 0/3] clk: dt: bindings for mux & divider clocks Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53 ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53 ` [PATCH RFC 1/3] clk: of: helper for determining number of parent clocks Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53   ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53   ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53 ` [PATCH RFC 2/3] clk: dt: binding for basic multiplexor clock Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53   ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 19:33   ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 19:33     ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 20:07     ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 20:07       ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 20:15       ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 20:15         ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 20:15         ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 21:39         ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 21:39           ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 21:39           ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-04  6:14           ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-04  6:14             ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53 ` [PATCH RFC 3/3] clk: dt: binding for basic divider clock Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 17:53   ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-03 22:18   ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 22:18     ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 22:18     ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-13  2:41     ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-13  2:41       ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-04 17:11   ` Stephen Boyd
2013-06-04 17:11     ` Stephen Boyd
2013-06-04 17:39     ` Matt Sealey
2013-06-04 17:39       ` Matt Sealey
2013-06-04 17:39       ` Matt Sealey
2013-06-04 19:22       ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-04 19:22         ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-04 20:13         ` Matt Sealey
2013-06-04 20:13           ` Matt Sealey
2013-06-06  0:09         ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-06  0:09           ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-06  0:09           ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 22:31 ` Heiko Stübner [this message]
2013-06-03 22:31   ` [PATCH RFC 0/3] clk: dt: bindings for mux & divider clocks Heiko Stübner
2013-06-03 22:31   ` Heiko Stübner
2013-06-07  5:51 ` Shawn Guo
2013-06-07  5:51   ` Shawn Guo
2013-06-07  5:51   ` Shawn Guo
2013-06-07 17:52   ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-07 17:52     ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-08  3:02     ` Shawn Guo
2013-06-08  3:02       ` Shawn Guo
2013-06-08  3:02       ` Shawn Guo
2013-06-08 18:25       ` Mike Turquette
2013-06-08 18:25         ` Mike Turquette

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201306040031.02935.heiko@sntech.de \
    --to=heiko@sntech.de \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.