From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2017 15:09:31 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] clk: sunxi-ng: add support for PRCM CCUs In-Reply-To: <20170301152236.MUXmRgOe@smtp1m.mail.yandex.net> References: <20170301152236.MUXmRgOe@smtp1m.mail.yandex.net> Message-ID: <20170302140931.tq3vpncln6giyjpr@lukather> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 08:22:13PM +0800, Icenowy Zheng wrote: > > I'm a bit worried by that to be honest. You claim to support the A31, > > yet jugdging by the current state of that code you never actually > > tested it on that SoC. > > > > What makes you say that the PRCM clocks are the same for the H3 and > > A64? We have to be sure, otherwise we might not be able to get the DT > > binding right from the very beginning, and we might not be able to fix > > it later. > > In fact, if we worry about this, we shouldn't make r-ccu, as > dedicated clocks are more easy to fix. > > For newer SoCs' PRCM, we never have enough documents, and Allwinner > have said that they cannot provide it. (I asked them for this.) > > The best solution is to implement mature enough dedicated clocks > before we convert to ccu. What do you mean by dedicated clocks? Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 801 bytes Desc: not available URL: