On 30/10/16 22:41, Rob Herring wrote:
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 03:45:59PM +0300, Tero Kristo wrote:
Add a clock implementation, TI SCI clock, that will hook to the common
clock framework, and allow each clock to be controlled via TI SCI
protocol.
Signed-off-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@xxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/clock/ti,sci-clk.txt | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++
MAINTAINERS | 1 +
2 files changed, 38 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ti,sci-clk.txt
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ti,sci-clk.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ti,sci-clk.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bfc3ca4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ti,sci-clk.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+Texas Instruments TI-SCI Clocks
+===============================
+
+All clocks on Texas Instruments' SoCs that contain a System Controller,
+are only controlled by this entity. Communication between a host processor
+running an OS and the System Controller happens through a protocol known
+as TI-SCI[1]. This clock implementation plugs into the common clock
+framework and makes use of the TI-SCI protocol on clock API requests.
+
+[1] Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/keystone/ti,sci.txt
+
+Required properties:
+-------------------
+- compatible: Must be "ti,k2g-sci-clk"
+- #clock-cells: Shall be 2.
+ In clock consumers, this cell represents the device ID and clock ID
+ exposed by the PM firmware. The assignments can be found in the header
+ files <dt-bindings/genpd/<soc>.h> (which covers the device IDs) and
+ <dt-bindings/clock/<soc>.h> (which covers the clock IDs), where <soc>
+ is the SoC involved, for example 'k2g'.
+
+Examples:
+--------
+
+pmmc: pmmc {
+ compatible = "ti,k2g-sci";
+
+ k2g_clks: k2g_clks {
Use "clocks" for node name instead.
+ compatible = "ti,k2g-sci-clk";
I'm starting to think all these child nodes for SCI are pointless. Is
there any reason why the parent node can't be the clock provider (along
with all the other providers it acks as)?
I believe the only reason to keep them separate is to have kernel side
of things modular. If we have separate nodes, the drivers can be probed
separately.
If not, we need to build one huge blob with all the features in it, so
the main driver can probe everything in one go, with annoying
back-and-forth callbacks in place (assuming we still want to keep stuff
somehow modular.)
-Tero
+ #clock-cells = <2>;
+ };
+};
+
+uart0: serial@2530c00 {
+ compatible = "ns16550a";
+ clocks = <&k2g_clks K2G_DEV_UART0 0>;
+};
--
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
