[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5728E936.2010503@ti.com>
Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 21:08:54 +0300
From: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>
To: "J.D. Schroeder" <Linux.HWI@...min.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <bcousson@...libre.com>,
<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <pawel.moll@....com>, <mark.rutland@....com>,
<ijc+devicetree@...lion.org.uk>, <galak@...eaurora.org>,
<linux@....linux.org.uk>, <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, <jay.schroeder@...min.com>,
Matthijs van Duin <matthijsvanduin@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: DRA7x: dts: Update the OSC_32K_CLK frequency
On 03/05/16 20:49, J.D. Schroeder wrote:
> On 05/03/2016 12:32 PM, Tero Kristo wrote:
>> Personally I would not recommend using this clock for any timing sensitive
>> applications. May I ask why you are interested in the exact clock rate of this
>> clock anyway?
>
> I'm not interested in using this clock and I'm not sure how anyone would use
> this clock outside of the processor. See the inline comment that is part of
> the change and the commit message for the change. There is no hint in my
> change that this is an exact clock rate. It is a clarifying change to help
> others avoid using this clock as a 32 kHz clock (which the current clock name
> and frequency imply) and it more accurately represents the actual hardware
> behavior.
>
Imo, if you want to clarify things up, the whole secure_32k_ck should be
removed from linux kernel.
-Tero
Powered by blists - more mailing lists