Re: [PATCH v8 04/07] arm64: renesas: r8a7795 dtsi: Add all SCIF nodes

[Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>]

Hi Geert,

On Thursday 03 September 2015 09:54:17 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:08 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 2:59 PM, Magnus Damm wrote:

[snip]

> >>> But if we're going down that route then may I ask why we have
> >>> "-clocks" suffix for the MSTP/CPG compat strings? I'd rather make them
> >>> shorter and more similar to the rest of the compat strings on the SoC.
> >> 
> >> It uses plural because CPG and MSTP nodes provide more than one clock.
> >> 
> >> Cfr. DIV6, which provides a single clock, and uses e.g.
> >> "renesas,r8a7791-div6-clock", "renesas,cpg-div6-clock" (singular).
> > 
> > Ok, thanks but my concern was not about singular vs plural.
> > Why do we need the "-clocks" suffix?
> > 
> > It's a detail, but for me the shorter "renesas,r8a7795-mstp" makes
> > more sense than "renesas,r8a7795-mstp-clocks"
> 
> The MSTP blocks are subsets of the CPG block, and their registers are
> heavily entangled with other registers inside the CPG and other MSTP blocks.
> So currently the MSTP nodes don't represent the MSTP blocks, but
> their clocks only (and not e.g. reset control).
> 
> I'm afraid the only sane way to express their full functionality is to have
> a single cpg_mstp node...

That might be a good idea. We could just use two clock cells and hide all the 
dirty details in C code. Anyone wants to give it a try ? :-)

-- 
Regards,

Laurent Pinchart