From: Ying.Liu@freescale.com (Liu Ying)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] ARM: imx6q: refactor some ldb related clocks
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 12:20:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5214401D.8010402@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5Afjp-zPzUaNE63L7Y2LjZbSrLupAJ_jFnf1Gg1+hx0Nw@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/20/2013 11:40 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> 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
>
I find there is a 'hole' in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx5-clock.txt as well.
The 'hole' was taken by tve_di(26) clock before.
Is this more acceptable?
ldb_di0_podf_unused 77
ldb_di1_podf_unused 78
Liu Ying
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Liu Ying <Ying.Liu@freescale.com>
To: Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
Cc: Sascha Hauer <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
DRI mailing list <dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 12:20:45 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5214401D.8010402@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5Afjp-zPzUaNE63L7Y2LjZbSrLupAJ_jFnf1Gg1+hx0Nw@mail.gmail.com>
On 08/20/2013 11:40 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote:
> 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
>
I find there is a 'hole' in Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx5-clock.txt as well.
The 'hole' was taken by tve_di(26) clock before.
Is this more acceptable?
ldb_di0_podf_unused 77
ldb_di1_podf_unused 78
Liu Ying
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-21 4:20 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
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 [this message]
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=5214401D.8010402@freescale.com \
--to=ying.liu@freescale.com \
--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.