Message-ID: <1372339810.8383.20.camel@cumari.coelho.fi> (sfid-20130627_153055_470025_1AF8FF39)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: dt: bindings: TI WiLink modules
From: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>
To: Nishanth Menon <nm@ti.com>
CC: <grant.likely@linaro.org>, <rob.herring@calxeda.com>,
	<devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
	lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Tony Lindgren" <tony@atomide.com>,
	linux-omap <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm@vger.kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:30:10 +0300
In-Reply-To: <51CC3CEE.3050004@ti.com>
References: <1372149330-24335-1-git-send-email-coelho@ti.com>
	  <51CBC1C8.1040301@gmail.com> <1372322851.18889.53.camel@cumari.coelho.fi>
	  <20130627125131.GA27285@kahuna>
	 <1372337887.8383.12.camel@cumari.coelho.fi>
	  <CAGo_u6qbt9dANgKq49xR=1qsCpUBhmVaPL4EK04XvTw+=4Z23g@mail.gmail.com>
	 <1372339148.8383.17.camel@cumari.coelho.fi> <51CC3CEE.3050004@ti.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 08:23 -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> On 06/27/2013 08:19 AM, Luciano Coelho wrote:
> > On Thu, 2013-06-27 at 08:15 -0500, Nishanth Menon wrote:
> >> On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 7:58 AM, Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com> wrote:
> >>> For the actual DTS files, I could add a wilink.dtsi with enumerations
> >>> for these values so they could be used in the node definitions.  But I'm
> >>> not sure it's going to be that valuable in the end.
> >> The  way GPIO HIGH was defined might help to provide guidance I think :)
> >
> > Where? As far as I can see, the GPIO flags are defined in a bitmap.
> 
> include/dt-bindings/gpio/gpio.h

Thanks! I don't see these macros used anywhere, though.

> And corresponding kernel header:
> include/linux/of_gpio.h

This seems to be a completely different thing.  This is the header that
contains the helper functions to get GPIO-related device tree nodes,
isn't it?


> just a hint. not saying frequencies were defined in header. for systems 
> that define frequencies - example cpufreq OPPs, clock node usage, we do 
> not use indexing to frequency, instead, that is the responsibility of 
> driver to convert frequency back to required index.
> git grep frequency Documentation/devicetree/bindings gives you how the 
> precedence looks like.
> 
> Personally, if given a choice, I'd go with actual frequencies rather 
> than indexes.

If I do that, I need to add also a separate flag to define whether the
XTAL clock is used or not.  For instance, we have 26MHz and 26MHz
crystal; and 38.4MHz and 38.4MHz crystal...

--
Luca.