On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Arnd Bergmann <a...@arndb.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 15 April 2014 17:20:47 Anders Berg wrote:
>> > > + gpio0: gpio@2010092000 {
>> > > + #gpio-cells = <2>;
>> > > + compatible = "arm,pl061", "arm,primecell";
>> > > + gpio-controller;
>> > > + reg = <0x20 0x10092000 0x00 0x1000>;
>> > > + interrupts = <GIC_SPI 10
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> > > + <GIC_SPI 11
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> > > + <GIC_SPI 12
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> > > + <GIC_SPI 13
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> > > + <GIC_SPI 14
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> > > + <GIC_SPI 15
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> > > + <GIC_SPI 16
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>,
>> > > + <GIC_SPI 17
>> > > IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_HIGH>;
>> > > + clocks = <&clk_per>;
>> > > + clock-names = "apb_pclk";
>> > > + status = "disabled";
>> >
>> > The pl061 binding does not specify any clocks at all. Do we need to update
>> > that?
>>
>> Doesn't all AMBA devices need at least one apb_pclk since the bus driver does
>> clk_get(...,"apb_pclk") before calling probe()?
>
> Yes, I was mostly wondering whether we had a policy about whether this clock
> should also be listed in the binding or not. My feeling is that it's better
> to make that explicit.
A separate patch to the GPIO maintainer for this will be accepted. :-)
Yours,
Linus Walleij
--
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/
