Re: [RFC v2 4/9] of: add clock providers

From: Jamie Iles
Date: Mon Dec 12 2011 - 18:29:12 EST


Hi Grant,

I'm still going through these and trying to digest them but a couple of
quick questions/comments.

Jamie

On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 03:02:04PM -0700, Grant Likely wrote:
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..e40c436
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt
> @@ -0,0 +1,114 @@
> +This binding is a work-in-progress, and are based on some experimental
> +work by benh[1].
> +
> +Sources of clock signal can be represented by any node in the device
> +tree. Those nodes are designated as clock providers. Clock consumer
> +nodes use a phandle and clock specifier pair to connect clock provider
> +outputs to clock inputs. Similar to the gpio specifiers, a clock
> +specifier is an array of one more more cells identifying the clock
> +output on a device. The length of a clock specifier is defined by the
> +value of a #clock-cells property in the clock provider node.
> +
> +[1] http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/31551/
> +
> +==Clock providers==
> +
> +Required properties:
> +#clock-cells: Number of cells in a clock specifier; typically will be
> + set to 1

I'm not sure I fully understand what the extra cells actually mean for
clocks. I think the first integer is the clock output to use but some
of the versatile and highbank ones only have a phandle or is it more
implementation defined? The clock-output-names description hints at
recommended, so I find this a little confusing, but that could just be
me!

> +Optional properties:
> +clock-output-names: Recommended to be a list of strings of clock output signal
> + names indexed by the first cell in the clock specifier.
> + However, the meaning of clock-output-name is domain
> + specific to the clock provider, and is only provided to
> + encourage using the same meaning for the majority of clock
> + providers. This format may not work for clock providers
> + using a complex clock specifier format. In those cases it
> + is recommended to omit this property and create a binding
> + specific names property.
> +
> + Clock consumer nodes must never directly reference
> + the provider's clock-output-name property.
> +
> +For example:
> +
> + oscillator {
> + #clock-cells = <1>;
> + clock-output-names = "ckil", "ckih";
> + };
> +
> +- this node defines a device with two clock outputs, the first named
> + "ckil" and the second named "ckih". Consumer nodes always reference
> + clocks by index. The names should reflect the clock output signal
> + names for the device.
> +
> +==Clock consumers==
> +
> +Required properties:
> +clocks: List of phandle and clock specifier pairs, one pair
> + for each clock input to the device.

Some of the highbank and versatile devicetree nodes have clocks
properties that aren't a pair e.g. versatile timer has
"clocks = <&tim_clk>;".

> +clock-names: List of clock input name strings sorted in the same
> + order as the clocks property. Consumers drivers
> + will use clock-names to match clock input names
> + with clocks specifiers.

The versatile and highbank patches appears to omit this required
property in several nodes. So is this really optional?

Jamie
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/