Am 31.05.2017 um 16:52 schrieb Mark Rutland:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 08:14:52AM +0200, Oleksij Rempel wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Oleksij Rempel <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: Michael Turquette <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Stephen Boyd <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Rob Herring <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Mark Rutland <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> ---
>> Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt | 4 ++++
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
>> index 9252912a5b0e..214cb5f461c7 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/imx6q-clock.txt
>> @@ -6,6 +6,10 @@ Required properties:
>> - interrupts: Should contain CCM interrupt
>> - #clock-cells: Should be <1>
>>
>> +Optional properties:
>> +- fsl,pmic_stby_poweroff: Configure CCM to assert PMIC_STBY_REQ signal
>> + on power off.
>
> s/_/-/ in property names, please.
ok.
I have now some more questions:
what naming schema should be actually used?
fsl,pmic-stby-poweroff
or
fsl,pmic-stby-power-off
i found some existing case:
sound/rt5660.txt:- realtek,poweroff-in-suspend
so in my case it will be:
fsl,standby-in-poweroff
or
fsl,standby-in-power-off
can we have generic name for this use case?
should I use same binding for PMIC and the SoC or they should be more like:
for SoC "standby-in-power-off"
and for PMIC "power-off-in-standby"
> When/why is this needed?
>
> Why should a DT author (not) set this?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
>> +
>> The clock consumer should specify the desired clock by having the clock
>> ID in its "clocks" phandle cell. See include/dt-bindings/clock/imx6qdl-clock.h
>> for the full list of i.MX6 Quad and DualLite clock IDs.
>> --
>> 2.11.0
>>
--
Regards,
Oleksij