On Thu, 2016-03-10 at 21:20:39 -0800, Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Lars-Peter Clausen [mailto:lars@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2016 6:10 PM > > To: Shubhrajyoti Datta; linux-spi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Cc: Soren Brinkmann; devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Michal Simek; > > broonie@xxxxxxxxxx; Shubhrajyoti Datta > > Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 2/2] bindings: spi: Add clock entries for spi-xilinx > > > > On 03/10/2016 01:11 PM, Shubhrajyoti Datta wrote: > > [...] > > > @@ -7,6 +7,9 @@ Required properties: > > > - interrupts : Property with a value describing the interrupt > > > number. > > > - interrupt-parent : Must be core interrupt controller > > > +- clocks: Input clock specifier. Refer to common clock bindings. > > > +- clock-names: tuple listing input clock names. > > > + Required elements: "spi_fclk" > > > > Sorry for being pedantic, but the core has two clock input "" and > > "ext_spi_clk". Which one is "spi_fclk"? > > However for all my designs I adhere to the recommendation see below both are from the same clock source. > I named it spi_fclk. > > Do you think I should have 2 clocks requests on the same clock. > > > http://www.xilinx.com/support/documentation/ip_documentation/axi_quad_spi/v2_00_a/ds843_axi_quad_spi.pdf > > page 12 > > 15. It is recommended that the AXI4 interface clock and EXT_SPI_CLK clock originate from the same clock source. If they can be separate they should both be modeled in the CCF. There is no issue of them coming from the same source. Also, the name should map to the name from the spec, as Lars pointed out already. You should not invent new names for clocks that are clearly defined in the data sheet. Sören -- 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
