linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM64: dts: enable clock support for Broadcom NS2

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 18 Nov 2015 16:07:51 -0800
From:	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:	Ray Jui <rjui@...adcom.com>, Jon Mason <jonmason@...adcom.com>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
	Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
	Ian Campbell <ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>,
	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] ARM64: dts: enable clock support for Broadcom NS2

On 18/11/15 16:03, Ray Jui wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/18/2015 3:13 PM, Jon Mason wrote:
>> Add device tree entries for clock support for Broadcom Northstar 2 SoC
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jon Mason <jonmason@...adcom.com>
>> ---
>>   arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/ns2.dtsi | 80
>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 79 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/ns2.dtsi
>> b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/ns2.dtsi
>> index 9610822..a510d3a 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/ns2.dtsi
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/boot/dts/broadcom/ns2.dtsi
>> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
>>    */
>>
>>   #include <dt-bindings/interrupt-controller/arm-gic.h>
>> +#include <dt-bindings/clock/bcm-ns2.h>
>>
>>   /memreserve/ 0x84b00000 0x00000008;
>>
>> @@ -109,6 +110,33 @@
>>                        <&A57_3>;
>>       };
>>
>> +    clocks {
> 
> Is this a new convention? That is, group all clocks without a base
> register address in a node named "clocks", but at the same time, put all
> other clocks with base register address under a bus node.

I do not think that is new, lots of platforms do that. The clock
providers/controllers would typically be in the 'bus' nodes because it
has a register interface, while the synthetic clocks would be under
'clocks'.
-- 
Florian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/