From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vaibhav Hiremath Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] mfd: 88pm800: Update the header file with 32K clk related macros Date: Wed, 05 Aug 2015 14:23:32 +0530 Message-ID: <55C1CF0C.1010805@linaro.org> References: <1437476823-3358-1-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> <1437476823-3358-2-git-send-email-vaibhav.hiremath@linaro.org> <20150723155233.GT3436@x1> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20150723155233.GT3436@x1> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Lee Jones Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, robh+dt@kernel.org, mturquette@baylibre.com, k.kozlowski@samsung.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thursday 23 July 2015 09:22 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > On Tue, 21 Jul 2015, Vaibhav Hiremath wrote: > >> Update header file with required macros for 32KHz buffered clock >> output of 88PM800 family of device. >> These macros will be used in clk provider driver. >> >> Signed-off-by: Vaibhav Hiremath >> --- >> include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h | 12 ++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h b/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h >> index 05d9bad..680e4eb 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h >> +++ b/include/linux/mfd/88pm80x.h >> @@ -91,6 +91,7 @@ enum { >> /* Referance and low power registers */ >> #define PM800_LOW_POWER1 (0x20) >> #define PM800_LOW_POWER2 (0x21) >> +#define PM800_LOW_POWER2_XO_LJ_EN BIT(5) >> >> #define PM800_LOW_POWER_CONFIG3 (0x22) >> #define PM800_LDOBK_FREEZE BIT(7) >> @@ -138,6 +139,13 @@ enum { >> #define PM800_ALARM BIT(5) >> #define PM800_RTC1_USE_XO BIT(7) >> >> +#define PM800_32K_OUTX_SEL_MASK (0x3) >> +/* 32KHz clk output sel mode */ >> +#define PM800_32K_OUTX_SEL_ZERO (0x0) >> +#define PM800_32K_OUTX_SEL_INT_32KHZ (0x1) >> +#define PM800_32K_OUTX_SEL_XO_32KHZ (0x2) >> +#define PM800_32K_OUTX_SEL_HIZ (0x3) > > Why do these need to be in brackets? > No specific reason, just made it consistent with other definitions in the file. I will fix in V2. Thanks, Vaibhav