On 06/02/2023 12:28, Li Chen wrote:

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?

I am not sure if I understand. osc does not look like parent device, so
this part of comment confuses me.

Best regards,
Krzysztof


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel