On Aug 16, 2013, at 11:43 AM, Kumar Gala wrote:
>
> On Aug 15, 2013, at 12:02 AM, Mike Turquette wrote:
>
>>> Right now we have
>>>
>>> pll8: pll8 {
>>> #clock-cells = <0>;
>>> compatible = "qcom,pll";
>>> clocks = <&pxo>;
>>> };
>>>
>>> in DT and
>>>
>>> static struct pll_desc pll8_desc = {
>>> .l_reg = 0x3144,
>>> .m_reg = 0x3148,
>>> .n_reg = 0x314c,
>>> .config_reg = 0x3154,
>>> .mode_reg = 0x3140,
>>> .status_reg = 0x3158,
>>> .status_bit = 16,
>>> };
>>>
>>> in C. Do you want everything to be in DT? Something like:
>>>
>>> pll8: pll8@3140 {
>>> #clock-cells = <0>;
>>> compatible = "qcom,pll";
>>> clocks = <&pxo>;
>>> reg = <0x3140 0x20>;
>>> };
>>>
>>> and then assume that all those registers are offset from the base
>>> register and that the status bit is 16 (it usually is but not
>>> always)?
>
> I think its reasonable to put the various regs associated with a clock in the
> .dts like the example you show, but we should be going down to bit level
> details. If we think of each clock as its own device its reasonable that the
> clock would have some set of registers associated with it.
oops, we should NOT be going down to bit level.
- k
--
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by
The Linux Foundation
--
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/
