[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9b82849e-516b-c798-994e-6bc8945c4831@collabora.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2022 12:32:14 +0200
From: AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
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
Il 01/09/22 12:30, Krzysztof Kozlowski ha scritto:
> 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.
>
Right. I like the last one a bit better, as well.
Thanks for the advices!
Angelo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists