Hi, On Thu, Feb 04, 2016 at 03:47:52PM +0100, Jean-Francois Moine wrote: > On Thu, 4 Feb 2016 00:33:46 +0100 > Krzysztof Adamski <k@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > This patch adds support for APB0 in H3. It seems to be compatible with > > earlier SOCs. apb0 gates controls R_ block peripherals (R_PIO, R_IR, > > etc). > > > > Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Adamski <k@xxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/sunxi.txt | 1 + > > drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-simple-gates.c | 2 ++ > > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/sunxi.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/sunxi.txt > > index e59f57b..751c8b9f0 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/sunxi.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/sunxi.txt > > @@ -45,6 +45,7 @@ Required properties: > > "allwinner,sun6i-a31-apb0-gates-clk" - for the APB0 gates on A31 > > "allwinner,sun7i-a20-apb0-gates-clk" - for the APB0 gates on A20 > > "allwinner,sun8i-a23-apb0-gates-clk" - for the APB0 gates on A23 > > + "allwinner,sun8i-h3-apb0-gates-clk" - for the APB0 gates on H3 > > "allwinner,sun9i-a80-apb0-gates-clk" - for the APB0 gates on A80 > > "allwinner,sun4i-a10-apb1-clk" - for the APB1 clock > > "allwinner,sun9i-a80-apb1-clk" - for the APB1 bus clock on A80 > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-simple-gates.c b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-simple-gates.c > > index f4da52b..6753c87 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-simple-gates.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/sunxi/clk-simple-gates.c > > @@ -130,6 +130,8 @@ CLK_OF_DECLARE(sun8i_a23_apb2, "allwinner,sun8i-a23-apb2-gates-clk", > > sunxi_simple_gates_init); > > CLK_OF_DECLARE(sun8i_a33_ahb1, "allwinner,sun8i-a33-ahb1-gates-clk", > > sunxi_simple_gates_init); > > +CLK_OF_DECLARE(sun8i_h3_apb0, "allwinner,sun8i-h3-apb0-gates-clk", > > + sunxi_simple_gates_init); > > CLK_OF_DECLARE(sun9i_a80_ahb0, "allwinner,sun9i-a80-ahb0-gates-clk", > > sunxi_simple_gates_init); > > CLK_OF_DECLARE(sun9i_a80_ahb1, "allwinner,sun9i-a80-ahb1-gates-clk", > > It seems that the other compatible strings are there for historical > reasons. Why do you need a new one with such a specific name? > > It would have been more sensible to add a generic compatible string as > "allwinner,apb-gates", letting the removal of the other strings for a > later patch... Yeah, it's a good idea, and it's probably time that we move to that. However, I'd like to keep per-soc and per-clocks compatibles in the DT, in case we need to protect a clock in the future. That doesn't prevent to have two compatibles thoughe, the specific and the generic. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
