From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@bootlin.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 11:32:53 +0100 Subject: [PATCH v3 1/6] Documentation: ARM: sunxi: pwm: add Allwinner sun8i. In-Reply-To: <20181127083523.pciie2gyaplrwiey@pengutronix.de> References: <20181125161859.GA5277@arx-s1> <20181127075226.qo3mv3o6etqdjaop@flea> <20181127083523.pciie2gyaplrwiey@pengutronix.de> Message-ID: <20181127103253.ubbjjy2ji6sxc7xs@flea> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 09:35:23AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > Hello, > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 08:52:26AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 12:18:59AM +0800, Hao Zhang wrote: > > > + - clocks: From common clock binding, handle to the parent clock. > > > + - clock-names: Must contain the clock names described just above. > > > > [...] > > > > You seem to have used mux-0 and mux-1 for the clock names. I guess we > > don't have to use a name there, we can simply use the position to find > > out (as long as it's documented in the binding) > > I also wondered if the driver relies on the fact that the second clock > is the faster running one. Is this sensible? Not really, I'm not sure we can make those expectations in the DT binding, especially since clock rate can change at runtime. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 228 bytes Desc: not available URL: