On Thu, 2015-04-09 at 02:18 -0500, Liberman Igal-B31950 wrote: > > > Regards, > Igal Liberman. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wood Scott-B07421 > > Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 12:12 AM > > To: Liberman Igal-B31950 > > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Subject: Re: [v2] dt/bindings: qoriq-clock: Add binding for FMan clock mux > > > > On Wed, 2015-04-08 at 10:43 +0300, Igal.Liberman wrote: > > > @@ -76,6 +77,52 @@ Required properties: > > > > > > Recommended properties: > > > - clocks: Should be the phandle of input parent clock > > > + For "fsl,fman-clk-mux" clock there are several options for parent > > > + clock (clock provider), the parent is determined according to the > > > + Reset Configuration Word of the specific device: > > > + * P2041, P3041: > > > + * 0 - equal to platform PLL divided by 2 > > > + * 1 - equal to PLL2 divided by 2 > > > + * P4080 (Both FMans): > > > + * 0 - equal to platform PLL divided by 2 > > > + * 1 - equal to PLL3 divided by 2 > > ... > > > > > > Again, the clock specifier format is determined by the clock provider, not the > > clock consumer. > > > > Scott, > The "clocks" property contains all possible clock providers, right? > In the text above I'm trying to explain how the FMan clock provider is determined and what are the options for each SoC. > Do you think that we shouldn't have this explanation? Can you please elaborate? I'm saying that the clock specifiers must be the same regardless of the node that is consuming the clock. You can't define certain values as only being "for fsl,fman-clk-mux". -Scott -- 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
