From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "dbasehore ." Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: dts: rockchip: rk3399: Add xin32k clk Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 21:17:15 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20181116004247.172977-1-dbasehore@chromium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Doug Anderson Cc: linux-kernel , linux-rockchip@lists.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?B?6LCi5L+u6ZGr?= , Chris Zhong , ayaka@soulik.info, "nickey.yang" , Shunqian Zheng , klaus.goger@theobroma-systems.com, Brian Norris , enric.balletbo@collabora.com, =?UTF-8?Q?Heiko_St=C3=BCbner?= , Mark Rutland , robh+dt@kernel.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 9:03 PM Doug Anderson wrote: > > Hi, > > On Thu, Nov 15, 2018 at 4:42 PM Derek Basehore wrote: > > > > This adds the xin32k clock to the RK3399 CPU. Even though it's not > > directly used, muxes will end up traversing the entire clk tree on > > calls to determine_rate if it doesn't exist. > > > > Signed-off-by: Derek Basehore > > --- > > arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi | 7 +++++++ > > 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi > > index 99e7f65c1779..6a32293982d0 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi > > +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/rockchip/rk3399.dtsi > > @@ -191,6 +191,13 @@ > > #clock-cells = <0>; > > }; > > > > + xin32k: xin32k { > > nit: xin32k is the name of the clock that rk3399 consumes. It seems a > little weird to name this node with that name. Can you call this: > > ap_rtc_clk: ap-rtc-clk > > ...after the gru schematic? You wouldn't change the > clock-output-names, just the node name / label. > > > > + compatible = "fixed-clock"; > > + clock-frequency = <32000>; > > I checked the datasheet for the 32K clock and it shows that this is a > 32768 Hz clock, not a 32000 Hz one. I also checked the rk808 clock > driver (which is supposed to be compatible with rk3399) and it > produces a 32768 clock. Ok, sending out an updated patch that addresses these concerns.