From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Figa Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/12] clk: samsung: add clock controller driver for s3c2410, s3c2440 and s3c2442 Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 23:37:16 +0100 Message-ID: <53028F1C.7090806@gmail.com> References: <201312131356.40755.heiko@sntech.de> <201312131401.52029.heiko@sntech.de> <52F7D842.5060609@gmail.com> <5643318.r2EB20boll@phil> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from mail-ea0-f174.google.com ([209.85.215.174]:51704 "EHLO mail-ea0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751445AbaBQWhY (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Feb 2014 17:37:24 -0500 Received: by mail-ea0-f174.google.com with SMTP id z10so4182008ead.19 for ; Mon, 17 Feb 2014 14:37:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5643318.r2EB20boll@phil> Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Heiko_St=FCbner?= Cc: Kukjin Kim , t.figa@samsung.com, mturquette@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org On 17.02.2014 22:05, Heiko St=FCbner wrote: > Hi Tomasz, > > Am Sonntag, 9. Februar 2014, 20:34:26 schrieb Tomasz Figa: >>> +/* >>> + * fixed rate clocks generated outside the soc >>> + * Only necessary until the devicetree-move is complete >>> + */ >>> +struct samsung_fixed_rate_clock s3c2410_common_frate_clks[] __init= data =3D >>> { >>> + FRATE(XTI, "xti", NULL, CLK_IS_ROOT, 0), >> >> Do you need to assign this clock an ID? When DT is used, it's define= d as >> a separate clock provider using fixed clock bindings, so it is not >> provided by this driver. > > I think that I'll need this (and similar on the s3c2412). This is due= to the > cpufreq driver for the earlier SoCs needing the xtal-frequency to cal= culate > the pll lock time (s3c24xx-cpufreq.c s3c_cpufreq_update_loctkime). > > Or do you have an idea on how to fix up the cpufreq driver in an easy= way? OK, I get the problem here. So you need the ID to register an alias. Still, the ID would be invalid when booted with DT and xti clock=20 registered using fixed rate clock bindings. So I'd suggest moving the=20 XTI clock ID definition from your DT binding header back to your driver= ,=20 leaving a comment in the header that this ID is reserved. What do you think? Best regards, Tomasz From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: tomasz.figa@gmail.com (Tomasz Figa) Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2014 23:37:16 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 08/12] clk: samsung: add clock controller driver for s3c2410, s3c2440 and s3c2442 In-Reply-To: <5643318.r2EB20boll@phil> References: <201312131356.40755.heiko@sntech.de> <201312131401.52029.heiko@sntech.de> <52F7D842.5060609@gmail.com> <5643318.r2EB20boll@phil> Message-ID: <53028F1C.7090806@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 17.02.2014 22:05, Heiko St?bner wrote: > Hi Tomasz, > > Am Sonntag, 9. Februar 2014, 20:34:26 schrieb Tomasz Figa: >>> +/* >>> + * fixed rate clocks generated outside the soc >>> + * Only necessary until the devicetree-move is complete >>> + */ >>> +struct samsung_fixed_rate_clock s3c2410_common_frate_clks[] __initdata = >>> { >>> + FRATE(XTI, "xti", NULL, CLK_IS_ROOT, 0), >> >> Do you need to assign this clock an ID? When DT is used, it's defined as >> a separate clock provider using fixed clock bindings, so it is not >> provided by this driver. > > I think that I'll need this (and similar on the s3c2412). This is due to the > cpufreq driver for the earlier SoCs needing the xtal-frequency to calculate > the pll lock time (s3c24xx-cpufreq.c s3c_cpufreq_update_loctkime). > > Or do you have an idea on how to fix up the cpufreq driver in an easy way? OK, I get the problem here. So you need the ID to register an alias. Still, the ID would be invalid when booted with DT and xti clock registered using fixed rate clock bindings. So I'd suggest moving the XTI clock ID definition from your DT binding header back to your driver, leaving a comment in the header that this ID is reserved. What do you think? Best regards, Tomasz