[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150313134211.GV20455@dragon>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 21:42:14 +0800
From: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@...akpoint.cc>
Cc: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Quentin Lambert <lambert.quentin@...il.com>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
t-kristo@...com, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v13 3/6] clk: Make clk API return per-user struct
clk instances
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 09:20:10AM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> Hi Shawn,
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 11:29:32AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
>
> > We did not add a DT property for it, because there was already enough
> > info (clock configuration) in DT for kernel to figure it out.
> Correct. My understanding is whatever can be figured out without DT should
> be done that way.
>
> Is there a way to get this clock-select bit set without
> enable_fec_anatop_clock() in u-boot? Because this one selects the clock and
> frequency and also sets the proper bit in gpr1. My question is simply why do
> we need to do this here as well.
I'm not sure I follow your question. But we had been doing this setup
in kernel function imx6q_1588_init() for a while. The problem we're
having now is that the clk core change broke it since v4.0-rc1. And the
fix is already queued there [1].
Shawn
[1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux.git/log/?h=clk-fixes
--
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