From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arnd Bergmann Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/6] ARM: at91/dt: define sama5d3 clocks Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 16:48:13 +0100 Message-ID: <201312091648.13802.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1385650171-8756-1-git-send-email-b.brezillon@overkiz.com> <201312090309.23723.arnd@arndb.de> <52A582AB.6010504@overkiz.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <52A582AB.6010504@overkiz.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org To: boris brezillon Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Russell King , Nicolas Ferre , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Turquette , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Monday 09 December 2013, boris brezillon wrote: > > You are adding "clock-names" properties in a lot of cases. Are you sure you > > are using the strings that are documented in the respective device bindings > > for each name? In a lot of cases, drivers just want an anonymous clock > > and we don't name them. > > I rechecked it, and almost all drivers call [devm_]clk_get with a > specific clock > name, and as a result we must specify the "clock-names" property. > The only exceptions I found are the spi and PIT (Periodic Interval > Timer) drivers, > and "clock-names" property is not defined in these nodes. Yes, I understood that the *drivers* use the names, but are they actually documented in the device bindings? If not, it might be better to change the drivers. Arnd