From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jyri Sarha Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] mmc: add support for power-on sequencing through DT Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2014 10:43:20 +0200 Message-ID: <52E61C28.1020207@ti.com> References: <1390190215-22700-1-git-send-email-olof@lixom.net> <1390190215-22700-2-git-send-email-olof@lixom.net> <20140120164859.GF15937@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Fabio Estevam , Russell King - ARM Linux Cc: Olof Johansson , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , robh+dt@kernel.org, Mark Rutland , Pawel Moll , ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.ok, Kumar Gala , chris@printf.net List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On 01/24/2014 07:35 PM, Fabio Estevam wrote: > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 2:48 PM, Russell King - ARM Linux > wrote: > >> So far so good. Now, what about this external oscillator which has its >> own separate power control. My immediate thought is that this can be >> specified via card_ext_clock - I would simply need to declare a fixed-rate >> clock with either a regulator (power switch) controlled via a gpio (which >> would probably be closer to the hardware) or a gpio as an enable... ah, >> that requires me to write a common clock driver for that bit since this >> is currently not modelled by CCF... > > Jiry Sarha posted a gpio controlled clock proposal: > http://www.spinics.net/lists/devicetree/msg16651.html > I have not received too much feedback to my patch yet. CCF is a bit new territory to me, but I think having a separate stackable clk-gpio would be more flexible than having the gpio property implemented in clk-fixed-rate. Anyway, I am happy do it either way as long as I can get a gpio -controlled clock implementation into the main line. Cheers, Jyri