[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aLz5RsjBoi0KVGSJ@pie>
Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2025 03:17:26 +0000
From: Yao Zi <ziyao@...root.org>
To: Xukai Wang <kingxukai@...omail.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
Samuel Holland <samuel.holland@...ive.com>,
Troy Mitchell <TroyMitchell988@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/3] clk: canaan: Add clock driver for Canaan K230
On Sun, Sep 07, 2025 at 03:13:07AM +0000, Yao Zi wrote:
> > +struct k230_clk_rate_self {
> > + struct clk_hw hw;
> > + void __iomem *reg;
> > + bool read_only;
>
> Isn't a read-only multiplier, divider or something capable of both a
> simple fixed-factor hardware? If so please switch to the existing clock
> hardware, instead of introducing a field in description of rate clocks.
>
> It's worth noting that you've already had at least one fixed-rate clock
> (shrm_sram_div2).
It should be "fixed-factor" clock instead of "fixed-rate" clock, sorry
for the typo.
Regards,
Yao Zi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists