[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <93d5de8e-31b2-4412-3348-7ba1903cde84@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 13:30:30 +0300
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
Johnson Wang <johnson.wang@...iatek.com>, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, sboyd@...nel.org
Cc: linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org,
Project_Global_Chrome_Upstream_Group@...iatek.com,
Edward-JW Yang <edward-jw.yang@...iatek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] dt-bindings: arm: mediatek: Add new bindings of
MediaTek frequency hopping
On 01/09/2022 13:22, AngeloGioacchino Del Regno wrote:
>> That's simply not a proper
>> hardware description, so again:
>>
>> 1. If this is separate device (as you indicated), then it needs
>> expressing the dependencies and uses of other device resources.
>
> Agreed. In this case, what about...
>
> mediatek,hopping-ssc-percents = <&provider CLK_SOMEPLL 3>;
>
> or would it be better to specify the clocks in a separated property?
>
> clocks = <&provider CLK_SOMEPLL>, <&provider CLK_SOME_OTHER_PLL>;
> mediatek,hopping-ssc-percents = <3>, <5>;
>
I propose the last one - using standard clocks property and a matching
table.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists