From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add i2c clocks
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 22:49:18 +0900
Message-ID: <20131218134914.GA32664@verge.net.au>
References: <1387316678-10174-1-git-send-email-wsa@the-dreams.de>
 <1387316678-10174-3-git-send-email-wsa@the-dreams.de>
 <52B1892B.1020806@cogentembedded.com>
 <20131218114351.GD3314@katana>
 <52B18CC9.8090200@cogentembedded.com>
 <20131218121541.GE3314@katana>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Return-path: <linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131218121541.GE3314@katana>
Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Cc: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>, Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 01:15:42PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2013 at 03:53:45PM +0400, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> > On 18-12-2013 15:43, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > 
> > >>>@@ -173,6 +179,10 @@ static struct clk_lookup lookups[] = {
> > >>>  	CLKDEV_CON_ID("mtu2_fck", &mstp_clks[MSTP33]),
> > 
> > >>>  	/* ICK */
> > >>>+	CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee000.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP97]),
> > >>>+	CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee400.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP96]),
> > >>>+	CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee800.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP95]),
> > >>>+	CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfeec00.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP94]),
> > 
> > >>    These belong to some other place, the group marked by /* ICK */
> > >>is only for CLKDEV_ICK_ID().
> > 
> > >So, I'll create a /* DEV */ prefix?
> > 
> >    I really don't know. Other places have /* MSTP */ comment in this
> > case despite all clocks, CLKDEV_DEV_ID() and CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are
> > really MSTP clocks. I considered the idea of separating
> > CLKDEV_ICK_ID() under /* ICK */ comment silly from the very start
> > but Simon didn't listen to me.
> 
> I am puzzled, too. ICK is a type of registration and not a clock domain.
> Also, there is 'mtu2_fck' which is under ICK as well as MSTP? Looks
> wrong. From what I understand now, removing the /* ICK */ comment would
> be easiest and proper?

I'm not sure that I really understand what all the fuss is about.

As I understand things the convention that prevails for
MSTP clocks under mach-shmobile is as follows:

1. Clocks not registered by CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
   under /* MSTP */ followed by:
2. Clocks registered using CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
   under /* ICK */

I am unsure of the historical reason for this but it does
seem to be consistent.