[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <186267bd495.c0d336602542450.72693939722996463@linux.beauty>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2023 19:28:14 +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 Fri, 27 Jan 2023 23:08:09 +0800 Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote ---
> On 27/01/2023 15:48, Li Chen wrote:
> > >
> > > but what you are saying is that there is no separate clock controller
> > > device with its own IO address but these clocks are part of rct_syscon.
> > > Then model it that way in DTS. The rct_syscon is then your clock
> > > controller and all these fake gclk-core and gclk-ddr nodes should be gone.
> >
> > Ok, I will remove these fake nodes, and model the hardware as:
> >
> > rct_syscon node
> > | clock node(pll, div, mux, composite clocks live in the same driver)
> > | other periphal nodes
>
> You need clock node if it takes any resources. If it doesn't, you do not
> need it.
If the only hardware resource the clock node can take is its parent clock(clocks = <&osc>;),
then can I have this clock node?
Regards,
Li
Powered by blists - more mailing lists