[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e0c5b9b4-889f-4571-b265-fb6b2885871a@kernel.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2025 10:16:33 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Denzeel Oliva <wachiturroxd150@...il.com>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>, Alim Akhtar <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>, Stephen Boyd
<sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] dt-bindings: clock: exynos990: Reorder IDs clocks
and extend
On 23/08/2025 19:27, Denzeel Oliva wrote:
>> This looks like a massive ABI break, where is the justification for
>> doing it?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Conor.
>
> Hi Conor,
>
> I reordered because the current IDs don’t match CMU_TOP:
> the PLL mux select is in PLL_CON0, not CON3, which gave wrong/low rates.
IDs are abstract, they cannot give wrong/low rates.
> I also added DPU/CMUREF and a missing fixed-factor path to stop bad rates
> and clk_summary hangs on hardware.
Not really related to ABI.
None of these justify changing the ABI or I don't understand the problem
at all.
Best regards,
Krzysztof
Powered by blists - more mailing lists