Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758496Ab3ENVB3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2013 17:01:29 -0400 Received: from multi.imgtec.com ([194.200.65.239]:44359 "EHLO multi.imgtec.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757791Ab3ENVB2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2013 17:01:28 -0400 Message-ID: <5192A61E.5020605@imgtec.com> Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 22:01:18 +0100 From: James Hogan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130110 Thunderbird/17.0.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mike Turquette CC: , LKML , Stephen Boyd Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] clk: implement remuxing during set_rate References: <1366388904-13903-1-git-send-email-james.hogan@imgtec.com> <20130513195746.10068.92303@quantum> <20130514165937.10068.18501@quantum> In-Reply-To: <20130514165937.10068.18501@quantum> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [192.168.154.65] X-SEF-Processed: 7_3_0_01181__2013_05_14_22_01_26 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1444 Lines: 36 Hi Mike, On 14/05/13 17:59, Mike Turquette wrote: > Quoting James Hogan (2013-05-13 14:30:46) >> On 13 May 2013 20:57, Mike Turquette wrote: >>> One reason for this is the difficulty some have had with setting flags >>> from DT bindings. >> >> Could you elaborate on this? I've been adding flags to DT bindings for >> this sort of thing, but it feels a bit like it's in that grey area of >> not really describing the hardware itself. This information needs to >> be specified somehow though. >> > > It depends on the flag. A good example is the CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED > flag which does describe the hardware. It informs the binding that > indexing starts at 1, not 0, which is a valid part of the hardware > description. > > However flags that deal with software policy do not belong on DT. > CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT certainly does not belong in the DT binding since > this is a pure Linux-ism. Every binding just needs to be reviewed on a > case-by-case basis to make sure the flags are related only to the > hardware. So given the desire to eliminate platform code, is there a particular way that these other flags can be specified instead of DT bindings? Cheers James -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/