On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 8:28 PM Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 04:32:51PM -0500, Adam Ford wrote:
> > The Versaclock can be purchased in a non-programmed configuration.
> > If that is the case, the driver needs to configure the chip to
> > output the correct signal type, voltage and slew.
> >
> > This RFC is proposing an additional binding to allow non-programmed
> > chips to be configured beyond their default configuration.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/idt,versaclock5.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/idt,versaclock5.txt
> > index 05a245c9df08..4bc46ed9ba4a 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/idt,versaclock5.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/idt,versaclock5.txt
> > @@ -30,6 +30,25 @@ Required properties:
> > - 5p49v5933 and
> > - 5p49v5935: (optional) property not present or "clkin".
> >
> > +For all output ports, an option child node can be used to specify:
> > +
> > +- mode: can be one of
> > + - LVPECL: Low-voltage positive/psuedo emitter-coupled logic
> > + - CMOS
> > + - HCSL
> > + - LVDS: Low voltage differential signal
> > +
> > +- voltage-level: can be one of the following microvolts
> > + - 1800000
> > + - 2500000
> > + - 3300000
> > +- slew: Percent of normal, can be one of
> > + - P80
> > + - P85
> > + - P90
> > + - P100
> > +
> > +
> > ==Mapping between clock specifier and physical pins==
> >
> > When referencing the provided clock in the DT using phandle and
> > @@ -62,6 +81,8 @@ clock specifier, the following mapping applies:
> >
> > ==Example==
> >
> > +#include <dt-bindings/versaclock.h>
> > +
> > /* 25MHz reference crystal */
> > ref25: ref25m {
> > compatible = "fixed-clock";
> > @@ -80,6 +101,13 @@ i2c-master-node {
> > /* Connect XIN input to 25MHz reference */
> > clocks = <&ref25m>;
> > clock-names = "xin";
> > +
> > + ports@1 {
>
> 'ports' is already taken as a node name.
Rob,
The clock chip can drive multiple clocks and each output is
independent of the rest. The idea is that port@1 would represent
output 1, port@2 would represent output 2, etc.
Is there a name you'd think we should use to represent each output?
Different variations of this chip can have different number of
outputs.
>
> > + reg = <1>;
>
> What do the reg value signify?
I am fine if we drop we drop it. I was under the assumption that reg
=<1> had to correspond to the port@1 and that it was required since
other devices with port sub-nodes use the reg entry.
>
> > + mode = <CMOS>;
> > + pwr_sel = <1800000>;
>
> Not documented. Don't use '-' in property names.
Do you have a preference to what name or convention you want us to use?
>
Thanks for the review.
adam
> > + slew = <P80>;
> > + };
> > };
> > };
> >
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
