[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMo8BfJdmB-=i4bJypHzGvegxgBPafpiT_hyQXLhvzBUmE+u_g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 22:15:40 +0300
From: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@...il.com>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc: Peter Korsgaard <peter@...sgaard.com>,
Peter Korsgaard <jacmet@...site.dk>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c-ocores: add common clock support
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 9:57 PM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> wrote:
> My suggestion is:
>
> 1) if there is a clk node:
> - we get the clock rate via clock framework
> - "clock-frequency" is describing the bus speed as usual (Note
> that parsing here can be as simple as checking for 100kHz only.
> Although a seperate patch could probably easily add support for
> other bus speeds to)
>
> 2?) a new binding is present to specify the IP clock speed:
> - is this needed? is somebody using the driver without CCF?
> - if so, the new binding is parsed and evaluated
> - I couldn't find an existing binding to specify a clock speed.
> Please have a look, too. Otherwise we need to introduce sth
> like "opencores,ip-clock-khz" probably.
> - "clock-frequency" is describing the bus speed as usual
>
> 3) only "clock-frequency" is present:
> - we keep the current behaviour to be backwards compatible.
> - driver should emit a warning to convert to new style
> - must be marked deprecated everywhere
>
> The documentation should be updated accordingly.
>
> Thoughts?
I can update my patch to do (1) and (3), leaving (2) to whoever may
need that.
--
Thanks.
-- Max
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists