linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/4] dt-bindings: clock: sophgo: support SG2042

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID:
 <MA0P287MB2822A18C53C4EDDEB2DAF42CFE6F2@MA0P287MB2822.INDP287.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2024 16:35:08 +0800
From: Chen Wang <unicorn_wang@...look.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
 Chen Wang <unicornxw@...il.com>, aou@...s.berkeley.edu, chao.wei@...hgo.com,
 krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org, mturquette@...libre.com,
 palmer@...belt.com, paul.walmsley@...ive.com, richardcochran@...il.com,
 robh+dt@...nel.org, sboyd@...nel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, haijiao.liu@...hgo.com,
 xiaoguang.xing@...hgo.com, guoren@...nel.org, jszhang@...nel.org,
 inochiama@...look.com, samuel.holland@...ive.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/4] dt-bindings: clock: sophgo: support SG2042

Conor and Krzysztof,

Just a quick question, due to I am planning to change the binding files 
you have reviewed,  should I remain your signature of “Reviewed-by" or 
remove it in next patchset?

On 2024/1/12 15:42, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2024 at 08:08:15AM +0800, Chen Wang wrote:
>> On 2024/1/12 0:58, Conor Dooley wrote:
>>> On Thu, Jan 11, 2024 at 04:00:04PM +0800, Chen Wang wrote:
>>>> There are four types of clocks for SG2042 and following are where their
>>>> control registers are defined in:
>>>>
>>>> PLL：all in SYS_CTRL
>>>> DIV: all in CLOCK
>>>> GATE: some are in SYS_CTRL, some others are in CLOCK
>>> When you say "some", do you meant some entire clocks are in SYS_CTRL and
>>> some entire clocks are in the CLOCKS? Or do you meant that for a given
>>> clock, some registers are in SYS_CTRL and some are in CLOCK? It's the
>>> first option, right?
>> It's the first option.
> Then the gate clocks that are fully contained within SYS_CTRL are
> outputs of SYS_CTRL and gate clocks fully contained within CLOCK are
> outputs of CLOCK. You should not use a phandle to SYS_CTRL from the
> CLOCKS node so that you can pretend they are part of CLOCKS just because
> that makes writing your driver easier. That said, obviously you can
> share the routines for turning the gates on and off etc.
>
> Cheers,
> Conor.