[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <152792036327.225090.14543251343485084840@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Fri, 01 Jun 2018 23:19:23 -0700
From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To: Anson Huang <Anson.Huang@....com>,
Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>, fabio.estevam@....com,
kernel@...gutronix.de, mark.rutland@....com,
matteo.lisi@...icam.com, michael@...rulasolutions.com,
mturquette@...libre.com, robh+dt@...nel.org, shawnguo@...nel.org
Cc: linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, Linux-imx@....com,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] clk: imx6ul: add GPIO clock gates
Quoting Stefan Wahren (2018-05-22 05:25:35)
> > +++ b/include/dt-bindings/clock/imx6ul-clock.h
> > @@ -242,20 +242,25 @@
> > #define IMX6UL_CLK_CKO2_PODF 229
> > #define IMX6UL_CLK_CKO2 230
> > #define IMX6UL_CLK_CKO 231
> > +#define IMX6UL_CLK_GPIO1 232
> > +#define IMX6UL_CLK_GPIO2 233
> > +#define IMX6UL_CLK_GPIO3 234
> > +#define IMX6UL_CLK_GPIO4 235
> > +#define IMX6UL_CLK_GPIO5 236
>
> this change looks like a breakage of devicetree ABI. You are changing the mean of the existing clock IDs on i.MX6ULL, which probably regress the combination of older DTBs with newer kernel.
>
Agreed. Why can't we just tack on more numbers at the end?
> >
> > /* For i.MX6ULL */
> > -#define IMX6ULL_CLK_ESAI_PRED 232
Powered by blists - more mailing lists