linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH 0/1] add multiple clock handling for dwc2 driver

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]

Date:   Tue, 07 Feb 2017 00:53:13 +0100
From:   Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
To:     Frank Wang <frank.wang@...k-chips.com>
Cc:     johnyoun@...opsys.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org, huangtao@...k-chips.com,
        kever.yang@...k-chips.com, william.wu@...k-chips.com,
        elaine.zhang@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 0/1] add multiple clock handling for dwc2 driver

Hi Frank,

Am Montag, 6. Februar 2017, 09:40:35 CET schrieb Frank Wang:
> On 2017/2/5 17:41, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, 5. Februar 2017, 10:51:00 CET schrieb Frank Wang:
> >> The original posting on Jan 19th have not received any responses, so I
> >> resend them.
> >> 
> >> The Current default dwc2 just handle one clock named otg, however, it may
> >> have two or more clock need to manage for some new SoCs(such as RK3328),
> >> so
> >> this adds change clk to clk's array of dwc2_hsotg to handle more clocks
> >> operation.
> > 
> > can you please give a bit more detail on the specific layout.
> > 
> > I guess you're talking about hclk_otg_pmu, right? What component does it
> > supply, because I didn't find anything in the partial TRM in the PMU
> > section relating to the "otg".
> 
> Yes, it is hclk_otg_pmu.
> 
> The rock-chip hclk_otg_pmu is an input clock for dwc2 PMU module which
> named pmu_hclk in chapter 2.4 of dwc otg databook v3.10.

ok great, on establishing that this is a actual part of the IP block.

I'm going to comment on the actual code change in a minute, so see you over 
there :-)

Heiko