[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9bdf757d-1fa0-106f-eb77-7f2a8593213f@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2023 15:09:02 +0100
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
To: Devi Priya <quic_devipriy@...cinc.com>, agross@...nel.org,
andersson@...nel.org, robh+dt@...nel.org,
krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
sboyd@...nel.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
catalin.marinas@....com, will@...nel.org, p.zabel@...gutronix.de,
shawnguo@...nel.org, arnd@...db.de, marcel.ziswiler@...adex.com,
dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org, nfraprado@...labora.com,
broonie@...nel.org, tdas@...eaurora.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: quic_srichara@...cinc.com, quic_gokulsri@...cinc.com,
quic_sjaganat@...cinc.com, quic_kathirav@...cinc.com,
quic_arajkuma@...cinc.com, quic_anusha@...cinc.com,
quic_poovendh@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/7] clk: qcom: Add Global Clock Controller driver for
IPQ9574
On 13.01.2023 14:21, Devi Priya wrote:
>
>
> On 1/10/2023 6:07 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 10.01.2023 13:13, devi priya wrote:
>>> Add Global Clock Controller (GCC) driver for ipq9574 based devices
>>>
>>> Co-developed-by: Anusha Rao <quic_anusha@...cinc.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Anusha Rao <quic_anusha@...cinc.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: devi priya <quic_devipriy@...cinc.com>
>>> ---
[...]
>>> +static struct clk_branch gcc_blsp1_qup6_i2c_apps_clk = {
>>> + .halt_reg = 0x07024,
>>> + .clkr = {
>>> + .enable_reg = 0x07024,
>>> + .enable_mask = BIT(0),
>>> + .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data) {
>>> + .name = "gcc_blsp1_qup6_i2c_apps_clk",
>>> + .parent_hws = (const struct clk_hw *[]) {
>>> + &blsp1_qup6_i2c_apps_clk_src.clkr.hw },
>>> + .num_parents = 1,
>>> + .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT | CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED,
>> Sounds very much like a hack..
> Got it, will remove the clock entry as it is not being used in linux
I'm not sure removing it is the best option, somebody might have a
funky board where they use this particular QUP for I2C for whatever
reason and then the clock would have to be re-added..
Thanks for addressing all of the review comments so thoroughly!
Konrad
Powered by blists - more mailing lists