On Wednesday 08 January 2014 11:52:44 Sebastian Reichel wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 03:39:36PM +0530, Roger Quadros wrote:
> > > What about the other clocks acquired in drivers/mfd/omap-usb-host.c?
> > > Shouldn't
> > > all of those be provided by via the DT phandle?
> >
> > All those clocks are identically named across the OMAP SoCs and are unique
> > for each
> > SoC, so providing DT phandle for all of them is not required.
> >
> > The init_60m_fclk was renamed to l3init_60m_fclk in OMAP5, and hence the
> > need for
> > this binding.
>
> I understand the intention of this patch. I was just wondering if
> all the clocks should be referenced from DT even if that is not
> strictly needed at the moment. This would make clocks similar to
> other resources like regulators, gpios, irqs, ...
>
> Having the clocks referenced from DT looks cleaner to me. It means I
> can check the DT file for any resources used by a driver. It also
> creates some kind of consistency in the kernel.
I think that would be best, yes. AFAIK most other platforms do this
already, OMAP is a bit behind because it started using clocks when the
infrastructure for doing this right was still incomplete.
Arnd
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
