On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:18:23AM +0800, Nicolin Chen wrote: > Hi Stephen, > > On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 09:47:19AM -0600, Stephen Warren wrote: > > If the clock source name list is different, then it needs a different > > compatible value, so that each compatible value can specify which clock > > names are required. > > > > Also, the compatible value itself should always include the exact HW > > that's present (most specific HW version), as well as any other HW it's > > compatible with. > > Thank you for the comments. Yes, I did so in v1-v3, but after rethinking > about the situation (Actually both the HW version and the clock mux itself > are same, just the clock sources connecting to the mux might be different), > so I decided to do this by abstracting the driver from those source info > and letting DT binding to pass such information. Because I think putting > the clock sources into the driver differed by compatible value would make > the driver more like SoC-specified, not the ideal way -- SoC-independent, > since the clock sources are based on SoC design, not on itself. +1 It's pretty much the differences at SoC integration level not the IP itself, and it just happens to be handled in a register of the IP. Shawn -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
