From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Bresticker Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 2/4] clk: samsung: register audio subsystem clocks using common clock framework Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2013 16:46:09 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1370236744-16802-1-git-send-email-padma.v@samsung.com> <1370236744-16802-3-git-send-email-padma.v@samsung.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Doug Anderson Cc: Padmavathi Venna , linux-samsung-soc , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, padma.kvr@gmail.com, sbkim73@samsung.com, Kukjin Kim , "broonie@kernel.org" , Mike Turquette List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org >> +static unsigned long reg_save[][2] = { >> + {ASS_CLK_SRC, 0}, >> + {ASS_CLK_DIV, 0}, >> + {ASS_CLK_GATE, 0}, >> +}; >> + >> +/* list of all parent clock list */ >> +static const char *mout_audss_p[] = { "fin_pll", "fout_epll" }; > > I think this is supposed to be "xxti" which might or might not be > "fin_pll". In the exynos4 code these are two different clocks that > are chosen by OM[0]. I'd bet that 99% of the time they are the same, > but it seems better to use "xxti". OM[0] also appears to mux the input here between "xxti" and "xusbxti" as well. So this should probably remain "fin_pll". > At the moment the 5250 code doesn't expose "xxti". It probably > should. Andrew (CCed) is looking at this. Yes, xxti is used directly elsewhere (SPI and UART, from what I can tell), but not here. -Andrew