From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Laurent Pinchart Date: Thu, 03 Sep 2015 11:48:19 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 04/07] arm64: renesas: r8a7795 dtsi: Add all SCIF nodes Message-Id: <2281844.A8nM2Jgb2C@avalon> List-Id: References: <20150831062952.24004.17072.sendpatchset@little-apple> In-Reply-To: <20150831062952.24004.17072.sendpatchset@little-apple> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-sh@vger.kernel.org Hi Geert, On Thursday 03 September 2015 09:54:17 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 9:41 AM, Magnus Damm 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