On Wednesday 08 January 2014 11:52:44 Sebastian Reichel wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 03:39:36PM +0530, 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. > > I understand the intention of this patch. I was just wondering if > all the clocks should be referenced from DT even if that is not > strictly needed at the moment. This would make clocks similar to > other resources like regulators, gpios, irqs, ... > > Having the clocks referenced from DT looks cleaner to me. It means I > can check the DT file for any resources used by a driver. It also > creates some kind of consistency in the kernel. I think that would be best, yes. AFAIK most other platforms do this already, OMAP is a bit behind because it started using clocks when the infrastructure for doing this right was still incomplete. Arnd -- 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
