From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mslow1.mail.gandi.net (mslow1.mail.gandi.net [217.70.178.240]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A89A02F80 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 08:38:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relay9-d.mail.gandi.net (unknown [217.70.183.199]) by mslow1.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4F5CC9069 for ; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 08:13:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (Authenticated sender: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com) by relay9-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73E60FF80B; Tue, 17 Aug 2021 08:13:11 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2021 10:13:11 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Maxime Ripard Cc: Andre Przywara , Chen-Yu Tsai , Jernej Skrabec , Rob Herring , Icenowy Zheng , Samuel Holland , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ondrej Jirman , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Alessandro Zummo , linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 02/11] dt-bindings: rtc: sun6i: Add H616 compatible string Message-ID: References: <20210723153838.6785-1-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20210723153838.6785-3-andre.przywara@arm.com> <20210726144137.6dauuxdssu7yszox@gilmour> <20210802013938.29fa18ed@slackpad.fritz.box> <20210817073810.7stuzrppyjf4spab@gilmour> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210817073810.7stuzrppyjf4spab@gilmour> On 17/08/2021 09:38:10+0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > It's not entirely clear to me what those clocks are about though. If we > > > look at the clock output in the user manual, it looks like there's only > > > two clocks that are actually being output: the 32k "fanout" clock and > > > the losc. What are the 3 you're talking about?] > > > > I see three: the raw SYSTEM "CLK32K_LOSC", the RTC input + debounce > > clock (/32), and the multiplexed PAD. > > But the input and debounce clock is only for the RTC itself right? So it > should be local to the driver and doesn't need to be made available to > the other drivers > Shouldn't they be exposed to be able to use assigned-clock? -- Alexandre Belloni, co-owner and COO, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com