[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <000fc63a-bba5-6fac-450b-5ed0f8a9bfea@ti.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2018 20:29:31 +0530
From: Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>
To: David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
CC: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 16/44] clk: davinci: Add platform information for TI
DM646x PSC
On Monday 08 January 2018 07:47 AM, David Lechner wrote:
> +void __init dm646x_psc_clk_init(void __iomem *psc)
> +{
> + struct clk_onecell_data *clk_data;
> +
> + clk_data = davinci_psc_register_clocks(psc, dm646x_psc_info, 41);
> + if (!clk_data)
> + return;
> +
> + clk_register_clkdev(clk_data->clks[0], "arm", NULL);
I don't think this "arm" con_id is used any where for non-DA850 SoCs.
And same with "dsp" in other files. Probably best to drop these dubious
usage ones rather than carry them forward.
Thanks,
Sekhar
Powered by blists - more mailing lists