From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from down.free-electrons.com ([37.187.137.238]:53477 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752277AbaJVPMO (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2014 11:12:14 -0400 Message-ID: <5447C8CC.7080306@free-electrons.com> Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 12:10:04 -0300 From: Ezequiel Garcia MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Thomas Petazzoni , Gregory CLEMENT CC: Jason Cooper , Daniel Lezcano , Thomas Gleixner , Wim Van Sebroeck , linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Nadav Haklai , Tawfik Bayouk , Lior Amsalem Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Make Armada 375 use the reference clock when possible References: <1413984884-20273-1-git-send-email-ezequiel.garcia@free-electrons.com> <5447C276.4050106@free-electrons.com> <20141022164919.4f4f4acf@free-electrons.com> In-Reply-To: <20141022164919.4f4f4acf@free-electrons.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Sender: linux-watchdog-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org On 10/22/2014 11:49 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Dear Gregory CLEMENT, >=20 > On Wed, 22 Oct 2014 16:43:02 +0200, Gregory CLEMENT wrote: >=20 >> On 22/10/2014 15:34, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: >>> This series adds support for the 25 MHz reference clock available o= n >>> Armada 375 SoC to use on the timer and watchdog drivers. It is >>> similar to the one present in Armada XP SoC. >> >> I agree with Thomas P. comments: could you see if it was possible to= reuse the same >> function and dt bindings that the ones used for Armada XP ? >> I am not aware of any difference between Armada XP and Armada 375 fo= r this IP. >=20 > Well, there's one difference: on Armada XP we don't need to support t= he > "old" Device Tree, which didn't had the fixed 25 Mhz clock input > described. >=20 Indeed. > So either we decide that it was a mistake due to an early version of > the 375 and we skip backward DT compatibility. Or we need in some way= a > different logic than Armada XP, because Armada XP doesn't have this > backward compatibility requirement. >=20 Backward DT compatibility is a must. For instance, patches can be merge= d through different routes (which has already happened) and you can break things badly. It doesn't worth the risk, for something that can be solved by just implementing things carefully. --=20 Ezequiel Garc=EDa, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-watchdo= g" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html