From: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
To: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>
Cc: grant.likely@linaro.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
rob.herring@calxeda.com, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
balbi@ti.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: dt: bindings: TI WiLink modules
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 01:22:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130626082257.GT5523@atomide.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1372234384.18889.37.camel@cumari.coelho.fi>
* Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com> [130626 01:19]:
> Hi Tony,
>
> On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 23:24 -0700, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > * Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com> [130625 12:43]:
> > > On Tue, 2013-06-25 at 11:35 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote:
> > > > Add device tree bindings documentation for the TI WiLink modules.
> > > > Currently only the WLAN part of the WiLink6, WiLink7 and WiLink8
> > > > modules is supported.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>
> > > > ---
>
> [...]
>
> > > > +Optional properties:
> > > > +--------------------
> > > > +
> > > > +- refclock: the internal WLAN reference clock frequency (required for
> > > > + WiLink6 and WiLink7; not used for WiLink8). Must be one of the
> > > > + following:
> > > > + 0 = 19.2 MHz
> > > > + 1 = 26.0 MHz
> > > > + 2 = 38.4 MHz
> > > > + 3 = 52.0 MHz
> > > > + 4 = 38.4 MHz, XTAL
> > > > + 5 = 26.0 MHz, XTAL
> >
> > This is just the omap refclock, right? If so, you can just pass the
> > standard clock phandle. I know we don't yet have the DT clocks merged,
> > but Tero just posted another revision of those.
>
> This is an internal clock. This clock is part of the module that
> contains the WiLink chip. It is not associated with the clocks in the
> main board (OMAP).
>
>
> > > > +- tcxoclock: the internal WLAN TCXO clock frequency (required for
> > > > + WiLink7 not used for WiLink6 and WiLink8). Must be one of the
> > > > + following:
> > > > + 0 = 19.200 MHz
> > > > + 1 = 26.000 MHz
> > > > + 2 = 38.400 MHz
> > > > + 3 = 52.000 MHz
> > > > + 4 = 16.368 MHz
> > > > + 5 = 32.736 MHz
> > > > + 6 = 16.800 MHz
> > > > + 7 = 33.600 MHz
> >
> > Where does this clock come from? Maybe this can be set based on the
> > compatible value if it's completely internal?
>
> This is also a completely internal clock. My "compatible" values are
> based on the WiLink chip itself, not in the module that contains the
> chip. There are several modules and they are the ones that specify the
> clock frequencies. This data I'm passing here is just to tell the
> WiLink chip which frequencies the module uses.
>
> My driver is for the WiLink chip itself, not to the module (in theory).
> So I think having the WiLink values as bindings would be more generic
> than having to specify values for each available module (eg.
> "lsr-research,tiwi-ble") and mapping those values to specific
> frequencies in the driver.
>
>
> > > If this is okay for everyone, can I push this via my tree (which goes to
> > > linux-wireless->net->linus)? I think it makes more sense to send the
> > > documentation together with the patch that actually implements the DT
> > > node parsing in the driver.
> >
> > If we can use the standard bindings, it might be worth waiting until
> > we have the DT clocks available as we have the pdata workaround merged
> > anyways. That's because then we don't need to support the custom
> > binding later on ;)
>
> I looked into Tero's patches and I considered using the generic clock
> bindings, but I think it doesn't make sense in this case. The thing is
> that the module is not providing the clocks to the main board. Neither
> is the WiLink chip consuming clocks from the main board.
>
> I thought about specifying clock providers and consumers to be used only
> by the module and WiLink chip, but I think it's overkill. And we would
> also have to find a way to prevent the main clock framework from trying
> to handle them.
>
> So, my conclusion was that, even though these *are* clocks, from the
> main board's perspective they're just specifications of what the module
> looks like.
>
> Does this make sense?
OK yes, in that case looks fine to me:
Acked-by: Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-26 8:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-25 8:35 [PATCH] Documentation: dt: bindings: TI WiLink modules Luciano Coelho
2013-06-25 11:12 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-06-25 11:56 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-25 13:07 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-06-25 19:35 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-25 19:37 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-26 6:24 ` Tony Lindgren
2013-06-26 8:13 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-26 8:22 ` Tony Lindgren [this message]
[not found] ` <51CBC1C8.1040301@gmail.com>
2013-06-27 8:47 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-27 12:51 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-06-27 12:58 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-27 13:15 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-06-27 13:19 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-27 13:23 ` Nishanth Menon
[not found] ` <51CC3CEE.3050004-l0cyMroinI0@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-27 13:30 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-27 13:39 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-06-27 18:51 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-27 19:12 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-06-27 19:46 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-27 19:56 ` Nishanth Menon
2013-06-28 9:38 ` Mark Rutland
2013-06-28 9:53 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-28 10:33 ` Mark Rutland
[not found] ` <1372413215.21065.41.camel-eHkr6bJ9aPyyenC2BZ5AVw@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-28 10:21 ` Mark Rutland
2013-06-28 10:31 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-28 11:22 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-28 11:41 ` Felipe Balbi
2013-06-28 12:13 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-28 12:18 ` Felipe Balbi
[not found] ` <20130628121859.GP11297-S8G//mZuvNWo5Im9Ml3/Zg@public.gmane.org>
2013-06-28 13:21 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-07-01 12:39 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-07-17 23:58 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-07-20 7:48 ` Luciano Coelho
2013-06-28 10:39 ` Mark Rutland
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=20130626082257.GT5523@atomide.com \
--to=tony@atomide.com \
--cc=balbi@ti.com \
--cc=coelho@ti.com \
--cc=devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rob.herring@calxeda.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).