On Tuesday 20 August 2013 06:41 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: > Quoting Santosh Shilimkar (2013-08-20 14:55:56) >> On Tuesday 20 August 2013 05:30 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: [...] >>>> They are bit different w.r.t OMAP. LPSC itself is the clock control of the >>>> IP. The LPSC number in the bindings is actually the specific number which >>>> is used to reach to the address space of the clock control. One can view >>>> that one as clock control register index. >>> >>> Thanks for the information. I have a further question about then: are >>> the LPSC clocks really module clocks that belong to the IP that they are >>> gating? >>> >> LPSC controls the clock enable/disable to the IP/module so answer is yes. >> In certain cases LPSC controls clock to more than one IP as well. >> >>> If so then they could be defined within the node defining their parent >>> IP. That might be enough to get rid of the LPSC index value. Again I >>> might be over-engineering it. Just trying to get an understanding. >>> >> Am not sure I follow you here on not having the LPSC index. Sorry. > > How are the 'reg' property and the 'lpsc' property related? Does the > lpsc property modify the register address used to access the clock > control bits? > Yes it does. Currently all nodes use fix address and then lpsc is used as an index. But I think we can do better by just using the right(offset) address in the reg property. Will have a look at it and see what I can do here. Thanks for asking this questions Mike regards, Santosh -- 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
