Hi! (Please keep all the recipiens in Cc) On Sun, Dec 02, 2018 at 12:13:21AM +0800, Hao Zhang wrote: > Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@xxxxxxxxxxx> 于2018年11月27日周二 下午6:33写道： > > > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 09:35:23AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 08:52:26AM +0100, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 12:18:59AM +0800, Hao Zhang wrote: > > > > > + - clocks: From common clock binding, handle to the parent clock. > > > > > + - clock-names: Must contain the clock names described just above. > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > You seem to have used mux-0 and mux-1 for the clock names. I guess we > > > > don't have to use a name there, we can simply use the position to find > > > > out (as long as it's documented in the binding) > > > > > > I also wondered if the driver relies on the fact that the second clock > > > is the faster running one. Is this sensible? > > > > Not really, I'm not sure we can make those expectations in the DT > > binding, especially since clock rate can change at runtime. > > How about just add one clock on DT, most of the time, 24MHZ is enough > (apb1 is 100MHZ) > other one just use as a optional. > clock rate change at runtime would make the same pair pwm channel > uncontrollable, > because previous one would be change by the new one different setting. The DT is a hardware representation. If the hardware block can use both clocks, it should be described. Now, you can totally use only one clock of these 2 in your driver if that's easier / more reasonable. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
