linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 07/15] dt-bindings: clock: Add Ambarella clock bindings

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <185f7dbf8f4.1146e435a489984.6909631260982981609@linux.beauty>
Date:   Sat, 28 Jan 2023 18:11:06 +0800
From:   Li Chen <me@...ux.beauty>
To:     "Krzysztof Kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc:     "li chen" <lchen@...arella.com>,
        "michael turquette" <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        "stephen boyd" <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        "rob herring" <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        "krzysztof kozlowski" <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        "moderated list:arm/ambarella soc support" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "open list:common clk framework" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:open firmware and flattened device tree bindings" 
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "arnd bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/15] dt-bindings: clock: Add Ambarella clock bindings

Hi Krzysztof,

 ---- On Sat, 28 Jan 2023 18:08:00 +0800  Krzysztof Kozlowski  wrote --- 
 > On 28/01/2023 10:42, Li Chen wrote:
 > > Got it, I will model it as:
 > > 
 > > rct_syscon(compatible include "ambarella, -clock"...)
 > > | peripheral A
 > > | peripheral B
 > > | ...
 > > 
 > > 
 > > One more question, two driver models:
 > > a. compatible = "ambarella, -clock", handle all clocks(pll, div, mux, composite) in single driver.
 > > b. compatible = "ambarella, -pll-clock", "ambarella, -composite-clock", "ambarella, -div-clock"...... 
 > >     and implement a driver for each of them.
 > > 
 > > Which driver model is preferred?
 > 
 > We do not talk here at all about drivers. This is independent and not
 > really related.
 > 
 > Anyway, independent features mostly have separate drivers. Each separate
 > driver should be located in respective subsystem. But again - we do not
 > talk here about drivers at all, so please do not bring them into the
 > problem. It will make everything more complicated...
 
Ok, that makes sense. Sorry about that.

Regards,
Li