On Thu, 2015-04-30 at 09:28 -0500, Liberman Igal-B31950 wrote:
quoted
-----Original Message-----
From: Wood Scott-B07421
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2015 3:31 AM
To: Liberman Igal-B31950
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org; Tang
Yuantian-B29983
Subject: Re: [v3] dt/bindings: qoriq-clock: Add binding for FMan clock mux
On Wed, 2015-04-22 at 05:47 -0500, Liberman Igal-B31950 wrote:
quoted
We have 2 cases:
- Devices (T2/T4/B4) with CLKCG1HWACSR register.
- Devices (Pxxxx, T1) without CLKCG1HWACSR register (Pxxxx
devices
quoted
have many options, T1 has only one option)
For the first group, we can have " qoriq-hwacsr" property in the clock node.
No, we're not going to describe every register with its own property.
Describe the chip and let the driver be the place with the knowledge of what
each chip is like.
I think that FMan clock mux (as we defined it) is similar to other muxes available in our SoC.
I realize that. I'm saying the way we described existing muxes seems to
be a mistake. We're putting too much complexity in the device tree.
Better to put the complexity in a place that isn't stable ABI.
If we take T4 as example, it has 3 muxes defined in the device tree (mux0, mux1 and mux2).
Each mux has its own reg property (and clock providers).
mux2: mux2@40 {
#clock-cells = <0>;
reg = <0x40 0x4>;
compatible = "fsl,qoriq-core-mux-2.0";
clocks = <&pll3 0>, <&pll3 1>, <&pll3 2>,
<&pll4 0>, <&pll4 1>, <&pll4 2>;
clock-names = "pll3", "pll3-div2", "pll3-div4",
"pll4", "pll4-div2", "pll4-div4";
clock-output-names = "cmux2";
};
I agree that "fm1-clk-mux" need to be moved from the "guts" node to "clockgen" node.
That's not what I was saying. I'm saying get rid of the node entirely,
in favor of having the clockgen node itself be a clock source with
multiple post-mux outputs.
However, I'm not sure which changes you want to perform in the node (beside adding reg property for SoC which has it for FMan clock).
Again, the clockgen node already has a reg property.
-Scott