On Fri, 07 Jun 2013, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 1:21 PM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> > ... as stipulated by the Hardware Specification document.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org>
>
> I think you need Ulf (as ux500 clock author) and Loic (as PRCMU
> developer) to have a look at this.
>
> > -enum prcmu_clock {
> > - PRCMU_SGACLK,
> (...)
> > +#define ARMCLK 0
> > +#define PRCMU_ACLK 1
> (...)
>
> It seems the enum and the defines want to do two different things?
>
> The first is a kernel-internal representation of the clocks, whereas
> the latter is a HW-centric representation for a certain PRCMU
> variant (I guess?)
>
> Does one actually exclude the other?
>From what I can tell, they're non-ordered values which are used as
read-ins to the clk_mgt array. So long as they are unique I'm not sure
the order matters. The current order seems 'made up', unless I'm
mistaken.
I agree that Ulf should take a look and confirm/deny my findings.
--
Lee Jones
Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog
--
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/
