Quoting Tomi Valkeinen (2014-09-19 06:25:48) > On 19/09/14 16:12, Nishanth Menon wrote: > > On 09/19/2014 08:07 AM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > >> On 16/09/14 23:40, Jyri Sarha wrote: > >>> The added ti,gpio-gate-clock is a basic clock that can be enabled and > >>> disabled trough a gpio output. The DT binding document for the clock > >>> is also added. For EPROBE_DEFER handling the registering of the clock > >>> has to be delayed until of_clk_get() call time. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Jyri Sarha <jsarha@xxxxxx> > >>> --- > >>> .../bindings/clock/ti/gpio-gate-clock.txt | 21 ++ > >>> drivers/clk/ti/Makefile | 2 +- > >>> drivers/clk/ti/gpio.c | 202 ++++++++++++++++++++ > >>> 3 files changed, 224 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > >>> create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/ti/gpio-gate-clock.txt > >>> create mode 100644 drivers/clk/ti/gpio.c > >> > >> Why is this a TI clock? Sounds like a generic one to me. > > > > Like thread: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/9/5/284 ? > > Right, I should've read the earlier versions before making any smart > comments =). No supporters cropped up for the generic gpio clock, but the design is common enough to merit a common clock type. And all of that stuff I said about the machine-specific ops isn't that relevant since it is hidden behing the gpio api. Regards, Mike > > Tomi > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
