Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 27 Nov 2018 09:35:23 +0100
From:   Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= 
        <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
To:     Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@bootlin.com>
Cc:     Hao Zhang <hao5781286@gmail.com>, robh+dt@kernel.org,
        mark.rutland@arm.com, wens@csie.org, mturquette@baylibre.com,
        sboyd@kernel.org, thierry.reding@gmail.com,
        linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-pwm@vger.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] Documentation: ARM: sunxi: pwm: add Allwinner
 sun8i.
Message-ID: <20181127083523.pciie2gyaplrwiey@pengutronix.de>
References: <20181125161859.GA5277@arx-s1>
 <20181127075226.qo3mv3o6etqdjaop@flea>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20181127075226.qo3mv3o6etqdjaop@flea>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hello,

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 08:52:26AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 12:18:59AM +0800, Hao Zhang wrote:
> > +  - clocks: From common clock binding, handle to the parent clock.
> > +  - clock-names: Must contain the clock names described just above.
> 
> [...]
> 
> You seem to have used mux-0 and mux-1 for the clock names. I guess we
> don't have to use a name there, we can simply use the position to find
> out (as long as it's documented in the binding)

I also wondered if the driver relies on the fact that the second clock
is the faster running one. Is this sensible?

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-K?nig            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |