"Karicheri, Muralidharan" <m-karicheri2@xxxxxx> writes:
> Kevin,
>
> I think I have figured it out...
>
> First issue was that I was adding my entry at the end of dm644x_clks[]
> array. I need to add it before the CLK(NULL, NULL, NULL)
>
> secondly, your suggestion didn't work as is. This is what I had to
> do to get it working...
>
> static struct clk ccdc_master_clk = {
> .name = "dm644x_ccdc",
> .parent = &vpss_master_clk,
> };
>
> static struct clk ccdc_slave_clk = {
> .name = "dm644x_ccdc",
> .parent = &vpss_slave_clk,
> };
You should not need to add new clocks with new names. I don't thinke
the name field of the struct clk is used anywhere in the matching.
I think it's only used in /proc/davinci_clocks
> static struct davinci_clk dm365_clks = {
> ....
> ....
> CLK("dm644x_ccdc", "master", &ccdc_master_clk),
> CLK("dm644x_ccdc", "slave", &ccdc_slave_clk),
Looks like the drivers name is 'dm644x_ccdc', not 'isif'. I'm
guessing just this should work without having to add new clock names.
CLK("dm644x_ccdc", "master", &vpss_master_clk),
CLK("dm644x_ccdc", "slave", &vpss_slave_clk),
> CLK(NULL, NULL, NULL);
>
> Let me know if you think there is anything wrong with the above scheme.
Kevin
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
