On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 08:55 -0600, Paul Walmsley wrote: > Hi > > On Fri, 8 Apr 2011, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > > and not the clock used for the pixel clock? If so, I'm fine with having > > "fck" to be what it is currently, but then we need a new name for the > > clock used for pixel clock, which is consistent on all platforms. > > If there is a separate PRCM-provided clock used only for the pixel clock, > then that clock should have an alias name of "system_pixel_ck" or > something similar that is meaningful to the DSS driver. I think the > problem in this case is that "dss_dss_clk" is (optionally) used for two > purposes: optionally as a "main PRCM-provided functional clock" and > optionally as a system-provided pixel clock. Not only for pixel clock, but in the end it'll come out as pixel clock. I'm not sure what exactly is a "functional clock" here. I mean, one could think it as a basic functionality of DSS to read the pixels, manipulate them, and output them (with the rate of the pixel clock). However, I think there is one difference between the clock used just to enable the DSS registers, and the one used to output pixels: we need to be able to adjust the rate of the clock. Thus we need to have a common (omap2/3/4) clock name for it to be able to clk_get() it. Should that clock name be just the "main" clock provided automatically, or something else? 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
