linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sergej Sawazki <ce3a@gmx.de>
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jsarha@ti.com
Subject: Re: clk: dt: bindings for mux-clock
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 20:19:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <55130A4E.9010305@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150322171009.7930.25481@quantum>

Am 22.03.2015 um 18:10 schrieb Michael Turquette:
> Quoting Sergej Sawazki (2015-03-19 14:50:50)
>> Hi Mike,
>>
>> I came across your "[PATCH v2 0/5] clk: dt: bindings for mux, divider &
>> gate clocks" email from 16 Jun 2013. The DT bindings for simple clock
>> multiplexers would be very helpful for a board I am working on. Do you
>> see any chance to get it into mainline?
>
> Hi Sergej,
>
> I abandoned those binding a while back. The reason is that those are
> one-node-per-clock bindings, which are unpopular with the DT crowd.
> Instead most bindings today use a single node to represent a clock
> provider, which maps onto a clock driver in Linux.
>
> Is your clock provider made up of only a single clock? If so then the
> bindings you mentioned above may be appropriate. But if you have a clock
> controller IP block that manages several clocks then it is better for
> you to follow the clock provider binding style. There is no shortage of
> good examples on how to do this. See the QCOM, Samsung and Nvidia
> bindings for ideas.
>
> Regards,
> Mike
>
>>
>> Many thanks in advance!
>> Regards,
>> Sergej
Hi Mike, many thanks for your answer.

My clock provider is made up of two external oscillators and an
external clock multiplexer. The clock multiplexer has two inputs and
one output. See IDT 853S01I for example. The oscillators are connected
to the multiplexer inputs. The clock consumer is connected to the
output of the multiplexer. The multiplexer is controlled by a gpio to
select one of the oscillators.

Based on clk-gpio-gate.c, I am considering to develop a driver for a
gpio controlled clock multiplexer. Do you think it makes sense? Or
should I choose a different approach?

Regards,
Sergej


  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-25 19:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-03-19 21:50 clk: dt: bindings for mux-clock Sergej Sawazki
2015-03-22 17:10 ` Michael Turquette
2015-03-25 19:19   ` Sergej Sawazki [this message]
2015-04-01  1:40     ` Michael Turquette

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=55130A4E.9010305@gmx.de \
    --to=ce3a@gmx.de \
    --cc=jsarha@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mturquette@linaro.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).