On 01/08/2014 03:49 PM, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Wednesday 08 January 2014 15:39:36 Roger Quadros wrote: >>> What about the other clocks acquired in drivers/mfd/omap-usb-host.c? Shouldn't >>> all of those be provided by via the DT phandle? >>> >> >> All those clocks are identically named across the OMAP SoCs and are unique for each >> SoC, so providing DT phandle for all of them is not required. >> >> The init_60m_fclk was renamed to l3init_60m_fclk in OMAP5, and hence the need for >> this binding. > > What do you mean it was renamed? Is it a different version of the omap-usb-host > device then? I meant the clock gates name on the SoC was renamed. The omap-usb-host device version is revised as well. >>> Should the clk_get be changed to of_clk_get()/of_clk_get_by_name() in the >>> driver? This would potentially remove the need of the init_60m_fclk name. >>> >> >> If we use of_clk_xxx() then we'll need to update DT nodes for OMAP4 and OMAP3 as >> well to explicitly provide the clock phandle. For now we make use of the fact that >> SoC clock data names the clock rightly i.e. "init_60m_fclk". > > I'm getting the feeling that init_60m_fclk is not the name of the clock input > of the omap-usb-host device at all, but rather the name of a signal on the > omap soc, which would not be an appropriate identifier for the binding. It is a clock gate defined like so in the DT clock data on OMAP4 init_60m_fclk: init_60m_fclk { #clock-cells = <0>; compatible = "ti,divider-clock"; clocks = <&dpll_usb_m2_ck>; reg = <0x0104>; ti,dividers = <1>, <8>; }; on OMAP5 l3init_60m_fclk: l3init_60m_fclk { #clock-cells = <0>; compatible = "ti,divider-clock"; clocks = <&dpll_usb_m2_ck>; reg = <0x0104>; ti,dividers = <1>, <8>; }; So you can see that it is the same thing with a different name. cheers, -roger -- 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