From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2013 04:36:49 +0000
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: shmobile: r8a7779: Correct TMU clock support again
Message-Id: <20130214043648.GA4773@verge.net.au>
List-Id: <linux-sh.vger.kernel.org>
References: <1360813381-3416-1-git-send-email-horms+renesas@verge.net.au>
 <87a9r7v8xd.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
 <CANqRtoQtROi1cD3MmykhKLqY+1Y2=f+1Qkmw2bjAaP6yZRPW=Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <878v6rv8ij.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
 <20130214042027.GD6036@verge.net.au>
 <87621vv7wa.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
In-Reply-To: <87621vv7wa.wl%kuninori.morimoto.gx@renesas.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 08:25:45PM -0800, Kuninori Morimoto wrote:
> 
> Hi Simon
> 
> > > >>       CLKDEV_DEV_ID("sh_tmu.0", &mstp_clks[MSTP016]), /* TMU00 */
> > > >> -     CLKDEV_DEV_ID("sh_tmu.1", &mstp_clks[MSTP015]), /* TMU01 */
> > > >> +     CLKDEV_DEV_ID("sh_tmu.1", &mstp_clks[MSTP016]), /* TMU01 */
> > > >>       CLKDEV_DEV_ID("sh_tmu.2", &mstp_clks[MSTP014]), /* TMU02 */
> (snip)
> > > This means that current TMU02 numbering seems doubtful too ?
> > > How about just rever 58079fa7d54a0929d304054ee759187a2ccd3cdf ?
> > 
> > Perhaps that is a good idea.
> > 
> > The original motivation for this patch was to add the TMU02 line.
> > And "fixing" TMU01 was an afterthought. However, I am also
> > now doubtful about the correctness of the TMU02 line and thus
> > the usefulness of the original patch.
> 
> I think this comment out is creating confusion ?
> 
> /* TMU00 */ -> /* TMU0 channel 0 */
> /* TMU01 */ -> /* TMU0 channel 1 */
> /* TMU02 */ -> /* TMU0 channel 2 */

That does make things a little clearer,
but I for one wasn't confused by the existing comments.