On 10/31/2016 07:50 AM, Tero Kristo wrote:
[...]
+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.)
Documentation/devicetree/bindings/arm/arm,scpi.txt follows the same
solution as well, right? There is indeed additional nodes coming in -
such as reset, pd etc.. I cant see why it is different for sci clk..
not to mention the driver mess it results in.
--
Regards,
Nishanth Menon
--
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
