From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next v2 1/8] dt-bindings: net: dwmac-sun8i: Clean up clock delay chain descriptions Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 14:03:30 +0200 Message-ID: <20180514120330.GA25241@lunn.ch> References: <20180513191425.9801-1-wens@csie.org> <20180513191425.9801-2-wens@csie.org> <20180513194919.GE12738@lunn.ch> <20180513200529.GF12738@lunn.ch> <20180513202938.GH12738@lunn.ch> <20180514072113.yts3shbojvbxj4tq@flea> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180514072113.yts3shbojvbxj4tq@flea> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Chen-Yu Tsai , Giuseppe Cavallaro , linux-arm-kernel , devicetree , netdev , Corentin Labbe , Icenowy Zheng , Rob Herring List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org > > Currently no other board requires this, but this is already part of the > > binding. The new stuff limits the range for a specific SoC, simply because > > that is the range supported by the control register. Not implementing, i.e. > > supporting the whole range from the property, which might get truncated, > > doesn't make much sense to me. > > With that driver we don't, but the previous design had the same > feature and it was used on more boards. It was simply initialized > statically in U-Boot, and not in Linux through the DT like it is done > here. If there are boards which do need it, then i'm fine with it. I would also prefer that Linux does set it, and don't rely on U-boot. Andrew