Re: [PATCHv2 1/3] dt-bindings: spi: Add DT bindings for Synquacer

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 9:53 AM, Jassi Brar [off-list ref] wrote:

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 8:45 PM, Rob Herring [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 7:05 AM,  [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted

From: Jassi Brar <redacted>

This patch adds documentation for Device-Tree bindings for the
Socionext Synquacer spi driver.

Signed-off-by: Jassi Brar <redacted>
---
 .../devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-synquacer.txt      | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-synquacer.txt

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-synquacer.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-synquacer.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d013cfd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/spi/spi-synquacer.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+* Socionext Synquacer HS-SPI bindings
+
+Required Properties:
+- compatible: should be "socionext,synquacer-spi"
+- reg: physical base address of the controller and length of memory mapped
+       region.
+- clocks: Must contain an entry for rate source clock(s).
+- clock-names: Shall be "iHCLK" or "iPCLK". iHCLK is preferred over iPCLK

Huh? The clock binding should reflect all clocks connected to a block,
not a selection of which one you want to use.

Both the clocks are internal to the block and derived from the same source.
Instead of defining a new "use-ipclk" property, the driver uses the
clock-names to choose the appropriate divider.
I am open to any better option.

If one is preferred, then why not always use it? Or how does one
decide which clock to use?

Rob
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-spi" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html