linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] mfd: omap-usb-host: Update DT clock binding information

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]

Message-ID: <4812867.NuB3hNkV9d@wuerfel>
Date:	Wed, 08 Jan 2014 11:19:28 +0100
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Roger Quadros <rogerq@...com>
Cc:	bcousson@...libre.com, tony@...mide.com, balbi@...com,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Kristo, Tero" <t-kristo@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/5] mfd: omap-usb-host: Update DT clock binding information

On Wednesday 08 January 2014 15:39:36 Roger Quadros wrote:
> > What about the other clocks acquired in drivers/mfd/omap-usb-host.c? Shouldn't
> > all of those be provided by via the DT phandle?
> > 
> 
> All those clocks are identically named across the OMAP SoCs and are unique for each
> SoC, so providing DT phandle for all of them is not required.
> 
> The init_60m_fclk was renamed to l3init_60m_fclk in OMAP5, and hence the need for
> this binding.

What do you mean it was renamed? Is it a different version of the omap-usb-host
device then?

> > Should the clk_get be changed to of_clk_get()/of_clk_get_by_name() in the
> > driver? This would potentially remove the need of the init_60m_fclk name.
> > 
> 
> If we use of_clk_xxx() then we'll need to update DT nodes for OMAP4 and OMAP3 as
> well to explicitly provide the clock phandle. For now we make use of the fact that
> SoC clock data names the clock rightly i.e. "init_60m_fclk".

I'm getting the feeling that init_60m_fclk is not the name of the clock input
of the omap-usb-host device at all, but rather the name of a signal on the
omap soc, which would not be an appropriate identifier for the binding.

	Arnd
--
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/