On 04/29, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Stephen Boyd (2014-04-04 11:45:36)
> > +Example:
> > + clock-controller@4000000 {
> > + compatible = "qcom,mmcc-msm8974";
> > + reg = <0x4000000 0x1000>;
> > + #clock-cells = <1>;
> > + #reset-cells = <1>;
> > +
> > + regulators {
> > + gdsc_oxili_gx: gdsc_oxili_gx {
> > + regulator-name = "gdsc_oxili_gx";
>
> Hi Stephen,
>
> It makes sense to model the gdsc's as regulators. It also makes sense to
> nest them within the clock-controller node, assuming that matches the
> register manual for your part.
>
> However, does it make sense to put this new code under drivers/clk/qcom?
> I don't see a compelling reason. How about breaking the registers out
> into a header for easier reuse?
What registers are we talking about? I put this under
drivers/clk/qcom because it's one device that happens to have all
these different driver subsystems in it (clocks, reset, gdsc).
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
