[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130308021527.GA28481@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2013 10:15:29 +0800
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Daniel Mack <zonque@...il.com>
Cc: Afzal Mohammed <afzal.mohd.ma@...il.com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Question about fixed-clock
On Thu, Mar 07, 2013 at 11:31:59PM +0100, Daniel Mack wrote:
> On 07.03.2013 19:42, Afzal Mohammed wrote:
> > I feel that for a platform having it's clock tree in DT, of_clk_init
> > would take care of it, but if clock tree data is not in DT, clock
> > tree would have to be extended in a non-DT way.
> Hmm, I don't follow. So for generic OMAP board in general which does
> *not* have its SoC clocks in DT, the question is who's in charge of
> registering out-of-SoC fixed clocks that are defined in DT.
> Note that the clock I'm dealing with here is _outside_ of the SoC, and I
> just need to have it in DT, so it can feed another clock chip's input pin.
> Grep'ing through arch/arm, it seems that the imx arch does the same
> thing my patch does, but I could also imagine that it should be done
> somewhere from the DT core. I copied Grant, Rob and Mark for more comments.
Wouldn't this just be set up by the DT in the same way that other
off-SoC hardware is?
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists