Quoting Taniya Das (2018-08-08 03:15:26) > > > On 8/8/2018 11:52 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> > >> Binding describes hardware controllable by the OS. That's the reality. > >> Let's not add mandatory clock bindings for clocks that the OS can't do > >> anything about. > >> > > > > It seems that you believe clks should only be used to turn on/off and > > control rates. That is not the whole truth. Sometimes clks are there > > just to express the clk frequencies that are present in the design so > > that drivers can figure out what to do. > > > > Stephen, > > As this clock is not configurable by linux clock drivers and we really > do not care the parent src(as mentioned by Saravana) to generate the > 300MHz, would it be good to define a fixed rate clock so as to express > the HW connectivity & frequency? > As a hack that works great, but why do we need to workaround problems by adding a fixed rate clk to DT for this PLL? The PLL is provided by GCC node so it should be connected to the GCC node.
