Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753886Ab3HVOTJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2013 10:19:09 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f46.google.com ([74.125.83.46]:62195 "EHLO mail-ee0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753865Ab3HVOTH (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2013 10:19:07 -0400 Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2013 15:19:00 +0100 From: Lee Jones To: Mark Rutland Cc: Linus Walleij , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Arnd Bergmann , Linus WALLEIJ , Srinidhi KASAGAR , "devicetree@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/33] ARM: ux500: Supply the I2C clocks lookup to the DBX500 DT Message-ID: <20130822141900.GB17154@lee--X1> References: <1370521041-32318-1-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <1370521041-32318-10-git-send-email-lee.jones@linaro.org> <20130820093034.GL31036@pengutronix.de> <20130822133730.GB23152@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20130822133730.GB23152@e106331-lin.cambridge.arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1996 Lines: 49 On Thu, 22 Aug 2013, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 10:30:34AM +0100, Sascha Hauer wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 11:11:19AM +0200, Linus Walleij wrote: > > > On Thu, Jun 6, 2013 at 2:16 PM, Lee Jones wrote: > > > > > > > +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/dbx5x0.dtsi > > > > @@ -572,6 +572,8 @@ > > > > v-i2c-supply = <&db8500_vape_reg>; > > > > > > > > clock-frequency = <400000>; > > > > + clocks = <&prcc_kclk 3 3>, <&prcc_pclk 3 3>; > > > > + clock-names = "nmk-i2c.0", "apb_pclk"; > > > > Why do most clocks in this series have the instance number in the clock > > names? This looks very wrong to me. > > +1. The clock names should be the input names to the unit, they > shouldn't vary per instance. So I just had a quick look, and it looks like they each have their own clock: clk = clk_reg_prcc_kclk("p1_i2c1_kclk", "i2cclk", clkrst1_base, BIT(2), CLK_SET_RATE_GATE); clk = clk_reg_prcc_kclk("p1_i2c2_kclk", "i2cclk", clkrst1_base, BIT(6), CLK_SET_RATE_GATE); clk = clk_reg_prcc_kclk("p2_i2c3_kclk", "i2cclk", clkrst2_base, BIT(0), CLK_SET_RATE_GATE); clk_register_clkdev(clk, NULL, "nmk-i2c.3"); /* etc */ When using the names in Device Tree it doesn't actually matter what you call the first clock. You can call it "fred" if you wanted and it would still work, but in light of the naming conventions above and the fact that each clock can all be controlled independently, do we still want to use the name of the parent clock i.e. i2cclk? -- 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 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/