On 9/13/2023 7:14 PM, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 13.09.2023 13:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 13/09/2023 12:48, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 13.09.2023 10:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 13/09/2023 10:47, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
On 13.09.2023 09:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
On 12/09/2023 15:31, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
These clocks are now handled from within the icc framework and are
That's a driver behavior, not hardware.
I believe we've been over this already..
The rationale behind this change is: that hardware, which falls
under the "interconnect" class, was previously misrepresented as
a bunch of clocks. There are clocks underneath, but accessing them
directly would be equivalent to e.g. circumventing the PHY subsystem
and initializing your UFS PHY from within the UFS device.
And every time one write such commit msg, how should we remember there
is some exception and actually it is about clock representation not CCF
or ICC framework.
So is your reply essentially "fine, but please make it clear in
each commit message"?
I am fine with this change. If commit msg had such statement, I would
not have doubts :/
Ok, I'll resend, thanks for confirming!
Is there any one continue working on this?
The bindings already merged while the dtb is not consistent with current
binding files. So dt bindings checks are failed actually.
Konrad
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
--
Thx and BRs,
Aiqun(Maria) Yu
