All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mturquette@linaro.org (Mike Turquette)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: imx6q: refactor some ldb related clocks
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:18:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130820211827.4443.97943@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5Afjp-zPzUaNE63L7Y2LjZbSrLupAJ_jFnf1Gg1+hx0Nw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Fabio Estevam (2013-08-20 08:40:52)
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Liu Ying <Ying.Liu@freescale.com> wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
> > index 5a90a72..90e923e 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
> > @@ -89,8 +89,6 @@ clocks and IDs.
> >         gpu3d_shader            74
> >         ipu1_podf               75
> >         ipu2_podf               76
> > -       ldb_di0_podf            77
> > -       ldb_di1_podf            78
> >         ipu1_di0_pre            79
> >         ipu1_di1_pre            80
> >         ipu2_di0_pre            81
> 
> This causes a 'hole' in the clock numbering scheme: 74, 75, 76, 79, 80, etc

How does this fit in with the idea of having a stable binding/ABI? Seems
like changing this would be a bad idea for devices in the field that
have older DTBs.

Regards,
Mike

> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
To: Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>, Liu Ying <Ying.Liu@freescale.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	DRI mailing list <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
	Sascha Hauer <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: imx6q: refactor some ldb related clocks
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:18:27 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130820211827.4443.97943@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5Afjp-zPzUaNE63L7Y2LjZbSrLupAJ_jFnf1Gg1+hx0Nw@mail.gmail.com>

Quoting Fabio Estevam (2013-08-20 08:40:52)
> On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:38 AM, Liu Ying <Ying.Liu@freescale.com> wrote:
> 
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
> > index 5a90a72..90e923e 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
> > @@ -89,8 +89,6 @@ clocks and IDs.
> >         gpu3d_shader            74
> >         ipu1_podf               75
> >         ipu2_podf               76
> > -       ldb_di0_podf            77
> > -       ldb_di1_podf            78
> >         ipu1_di0_pre            79
> >         ipu1_di1_pre            80
> >         ipu2_di0_pre            81
> 
> This causes a 'hole' in the clock numbering scheme: 74, 75, 76, 79, 80, etc

How does this fit in with the idea of having a stable binding/ABI? Seems
like changing this would be a bad idea for devices in the field that
have older DTBs.

Regards,
Mike

> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-20 21:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-20  8:38 [PATCH 0/3] refactor some ldb related clocks Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38 ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38 ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38 ` [PATCH 1/3] ARM: imx6q: " Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38   ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38   ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20 15:40   ` Fabio Estevam
2013-08-20 15:40     ` Fabio Estevam
2013-08-20 21:18     ` Mike Turquette [this message]
2013-08-20 21:18       ` Mike Turquette
2013-08-21  1:40       ` Shawn Guo
2013-08-21  1:40         ` Shawn Guo
2013-08-21  4:20     ` Liu Ying
2013-08-21  4:20       ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38 ` [PATCH 2/3] ARM: dts: imx6q/imx6dl: add necessary clocks for ldb node Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38   ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38   ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38 ` [PATCH 3/3] staging: drm/imx: ldb: correct the ldb di clock trees Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38   ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  8:38   ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20  9:43 ` [PATCH 0/3] refactor some ldb related clocks Philipp Zabel
2013-08-20  9:43   ` Philipp Zabel
2013-08-20 10:08   ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20 10:08     ` Liu Ying
2013-08-20 10:08     ` Liu Ying
2013-08-21  1:59     ` Shawn Guo
2013-08-21  1:59       ` Shawn Guo
2013-08-21  1:59       ` Shawn Guo
2013-08-21  4:12       ` Liu Ying
2013-08-21  4:12         ` Liu Ying
2013-08-21  4:12         ` Liu Ying

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=20130820211827.4443.97943@quantum \
    --to=mturquette@linaro.org \
    --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.