From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] arm: twr-k70f120m: clock driver for Kinetis SoC
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 00:08:27 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1507030006280.3916@nanos>
References: <1435667250-28299-1-git-send-email-pawelo@king.net.pl>
 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1507011756140.14440@localhost.localdomain>
 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1507021206410.13210@localhost.localdomain>
 <1861313.aMcV1xHCIq@wuerfel>
 <alpine.LNX.2.00.1507022338070.28322@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1507022338070.28322@localhost.localdomain>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/linux-arm-kernel>,
 <mailto:linux-arm-kernel-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/>
List-Post: <mailto:linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linux-arm-kernel-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel>,
 <mailto:linux-arm-kernel-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" <linux-arm-kernel-bounces@lists.infradead.org>
Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=m.gmane.org@lists.infradead.org
To: Paul Osmialowski <pawelo@king.net.pl>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>, Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@linaro.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>, Rob Herring <r.herring@freescale.com>, Alexander Potashev <aspotashev@emcraft.com>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, Uwe Kleine-Koenig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>, Anson Huang <b20788@freescale.com>, Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Frank Li <Frank.Li@freescale.com>, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>, Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@hellion.org.uk>, Jingchang Lu <jingchang.lu@freescale.com>, Yuri Tikhonov <yur@emcraft.com>, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infrad
List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2 Jul 2015, Paul Osmialowski wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jul 2015, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> 
> > I wonder if you could move out the fixed rate clocks into their own
> > nodes. Are they actually controlled by the same block? If they are
> > just fixed, you can use the normal binding for fixed rate clocks
> > and only describe the clocks that are related to the driver.
> 
> In my view having these clocks grouped together looks more convincing. After
> all, they all share the same I/O regs in order to read configuration.

The fact that they share a register is not making them a group. That's
just a HW design decision and you need to deal with that by protecting
the register access, but not by trying to group them artificially at
the functional level.

Thanks,

	tglx