Hi Rob,
Thanks for reviewing
On 10/08/2016 10:50 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 04:25:08PM +0200, gabriel.fernan...@st.com wrote:
From: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernan...@st.com>
This patch adds the QSPI clock for stm32f469 discovery board.
The gate mapping is a little bit different from stm32f429 soc.
Signed-off-by: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernan...@st.com>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt | 4 +-
drivers/clk/clk-stm32f4.c | 173 ++++++++++++++++++---
2 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt
b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt
index fee3205..eace3de 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt
@@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Please also refer to clock-bindings.txt in this directory for
common clock
controller binding usage.
Required properties:
-- compatible: Should be "st,stm32f42xx-rcc"
+- compatible: Should be:
+ "st,stm32f42xx-rcc"
+ "st,stm32f46xx-rcc"
Generally, we don't use wildcards in compatible strings. I know there's
lots of part numbers of stm32 parts which I guess are often same die
with different fusing or package. Your compatible strings should be at
least specific enough to identify parts that are really different die.
okay i will propose "st,stm32f469-rcc" if no one is against.
BR
Gabriel
- reg: should be register base and length as documented in the
datasheet
- #clock-cells: 2, device nodes should specify the clock in their "clocks"
