On Mon, 27 Jul 2015, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi Lee, > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 02:04:15PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt | 39 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt > > index 06fc6d5..4137034 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/clock-bindings.txt > > @@ -44,6 +44,45 @@ For example: > > clocks by index. The names should reflect the clock output signal > > names for the device. > > > > +critical-clock: Some hardware contains bunches of clocks which, in normal > > + circumstances, must never be turned off. If drivers a) fail to > > + obtain a reference to any of these or b) give up a previously > > + obtained reference during suspend, it is possible that some > > + Operating Systems might attempt to disable them to save power. > > + If this happens a platform can fail irrecoverably as a result. > > + Usually the only way to recover from these failures is to > > + reboot. > > + > > + To avoid either of these two scenarios from catastrophically > > + disabling an otherwise perfectly healthy running system, > > + clocks can be identified as 'critical' using this property from > > + inside a clocksource's node. > > + > > + This property is not to be abused. It is only to be used to > > + protect platforms from being crippled by gated clocks, NOT as a > > + convenience function to avoid using the framework correctly > > + inside device drivers. > > + > > + Expected values are hardware clock indices. If the > > + clock-indices property (see below) is used, then supplied > > + values must correspond to one of the listed identifiers. > > + Using the clock-indices example below, hardware clock <2> > > + is missing, therefore it is considered invalid to then > > + list clock <2> as a critical clock. > > I think we should also consider having it simply as a boolean. Using > indices for clocks that don't have any (for example because it only > provides a single clock) seem to not really make much sense. Then how would you distinguish between the clocks if the provider provides more than a single clock? > Also, since you can have a bunch of them, using critical-clocks seem > more appropriate. I can change the name to critical-clocks, no problem. -- Lee Jones Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- 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
