linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] dt-bindings: clock: samsung: add bindings for Exynos external clock

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]

Message-ID: <fb4cf910-8465-7efc-184f-eef691cf614d@canonical.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Aug 2021 08:45:19 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
To:     Sam Protsenko <semen.protsenko@...aro.org>
Cc:     Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
        Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
        linux-clk <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-arm Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux Samsung SOC <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/8] dt-bindings: clock: samsung: add bindings for
 Exynos external clock

On 10/08/2021 19:49, Sam Protsenko wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Aug 2021 at 12:32, Krzysztof Kozlowski
> <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com> wrote:
>>
>> Document the bindings for Samsung Exynos external to SoC
>> (oscclk/XXTI/XusbXTI) clock provided on boards.  The bindings are
>> already implemented in most of the Exynos clock drivers and DTS files.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...onical.com>
>> ---
> 
> Just want to mention that remaining users of such fixed clocks can be
> converted to regular fixed-rate-clock, and then this binding can be
> removed along with samsung_clk_of_register_fixed_ext() API? Just a
> thought.

Removal of samsung_clk_of_register_fixed_ext() would cause ABI break,
probably acceptable for these devices. Yet still, someone would have to
do it and test it.



Best regards,
Krzysztof