On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 02:18 -0500, Liberman Igal-B31950 wrote: > > > Regards, > Igal Liberman. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > > Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 12:12 AM > > To: Liberman Igal-B31950 > > Cc: devicet...@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org > > Subject: Re: [v2] dt/bindings: qoriq-clock: Add binding for FMan clock mux > > > > On Wed, 2015-04-08 at 10:43 +0300, Igal.Liberman wrote: > > > @@ -76,6 +77,52 @@ Required properties: > > > > > > Recommended properties: > > > - clocks: Should be the phandle of input parent clock > > > + For "fsl,fman-clk-mux" clock there are several options for parent > > > + clock (clock provider), the parent is determined according to the > > > + Reset Configuration Word of the specific device: > > > + * P2041, P3041: > > > + * 0 - equal to platform PLL divided by 2 > > > + * 1 - equal to PLL2 divided by 2 > > > + * P4080 (Both FMans): > > > + * 0 - equal to platform PLL divided by 2 > > > + * 1 - equal to PLL3 divided by 2 > > ... > > > > > > Again, the clock specifier format is determined by the clock provider, not > > the > > clock consumer. > > > > Scott, > The "clocks" property contains all possible clock providers, right? > In the text above I'm trying to explain how the FMan clock provider is > determined and what are the options for each SoC. > Do you think that we shouldn't have this explanation? Can you please > elaborate?
I'm saying that the clock specifiers must be the same regardless of the node that is consuming the clock. You can't define certain values as only being "for fsl,fman-clk-mux". -Scott _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
