From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/10] clk: exynos5420: register clocks using common clock framework
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:27:22 +0200
Message-ID: <3875156.5RFgBjMoqF@wuerfel>
References: <1371466836-4111-1-git-send-email-chander.kashyap@linaro.org> <1371466836-4111-7-git-send-email-chander.kashyap@linaro.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Return-path: <linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1371466836-4111-7-git-send-email-chander.kashyap@linaro.org>
Sender: linux-samsung-soc-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Chander Kashyap <chander.kashyap@linaro.org>, mark.rutland@arm.com, kgene.kim@samsung.com, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, t.figa@samsung.com, linux-samsung-soc@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Abraham <thomas.abraham@linaro.org>, thomas.ab@samsung.com, s.nawrocki@samsung.com
List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org

On Monday 17 June 2013 16:30:31 Chander Kashyap wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/exynos5420-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/exynos5420-clock.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..9bcc4b1
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/exynos5420-clock.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,201 @@
> +* Samsung Exynos5420 Clock Controller
> +
> +The Exynos5420 clock controller generates and supplies clock to various
> +controllers within the Exynos5420 SoC.
> +
> +Required Properties:
> +
> +- comptible: should be one of the following.
> +  - "samsung,exynos5420-clock" - controller compatible with Exynos5420 SoC.
> +
> +- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
> +  region.
> +
> +- #clock-cells: should be 1.
> +
> +The following is the list of clocks generated by the controller. Each clock is
> +assigned an identifier and client nodes use this identifier to specify the
> +clock which they consume.
> +
> +
> +       [Core Clocks]
> +
> +  Clock			ID
> +  ----------------------------
> +
> +  fin_pll		1
> +
> +  [Clock Gate for Special Clocks]
> +
> +  Clock			ID
> +  ----------------------------
> +  sclk_uart0		128
> +  sclk_uart1		129
> +  sclk_uart2		130

> +
> +   [Peripheral Clock Gates]
> +
> +  Clock			ID
> +  ----------------------------
> +
> +  aclk66_peric		256
> +  uart0			257
> +  uart1			258

It looks like these are actually separate things. Wouldn't it be more sensible
to have separate device nodes for each of the lists and use a local index?

What numbers are used in the data sheet?

	Arnd