Quoting Sergio Paracuellos (2020-12-17 02:01:39)
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 9:58 AM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Quoting Sergio Paracuellos (2020-11-22 01:55:52)
> >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt7621-clk.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt7621-clk.yaml
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..6aca4c1a4a46
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/mediatek,mt7621-clk.yaml
> >
> > > + compatible = "mediatek,mt7621-sysc", "syscon";
> > > + reg = <0x0 0x100>;
> > > +
> > > + pll {
> >
> > clock-controller? Why can't the parent device be the clk provider and
> > have #clock-cells?
> >
>
> I don't get your point, sorry. Can you please explain this a bit more
> or point to me to an example to understand the real meaning of this?
It looks like this is a made up child node of syscon so that a driver
can probe in the kernel. It would be more DT friendly to create a
platform device from the parent node's driver, or just register the clks
with the framework directly in that driver.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
