Re: [PATCH V2 1/3] clk: samsung: register audio subsystem clocks using common clock framework

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi,

On 05/11/2013 12:13 PM, Padma Venkat wrote:
+CLK_OF_DECLARE(exynos4210_audss_clk, "samsung,exynos4210-audss-clock",
>>  +             samsung_audss_clk_init);
>>  +CLK_OF_DECLARE(exynos5250_audss_clk, "samsung,exynos5250-audss-clock",
>>  +             samsung_audss_clk_init);
>
>  Also if both Exynos4210 and Exynos5250 have exactly the same audss clock
>  layout, there is no reason to have two compatibles for them - the
>  convention is that just the first model that had this hardware is enough -
>  in this case Exynos4210.
>
>  Having two different compatibles suggests that those two SoCs differ in a
>  way that needs special handling, which is misleading, based on the fact
>  that there is no such special handling in the driver.

There is only one difference between Exynos4 and Exynos5 is bit 1 of
CLK_GATE register where in Exynos5 it is reserved and Exynos4 it is
gate to IntMEM. I am not sure if we use this bit some where? So is it
okey to have same compatible with this diff?

I think such difference warrants separate compatible properties, as Exynos5250 seems to be not compatible with Exynos4210 in that case. Reserved bits should
be left untouched.

I wouldn't be surprised to see more differences we might be overlooking now. IMHO it's better to be save than sorry, keeping both 'compatible' strings as
they are now.

Regards,
Sylwester
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-samsung-soc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux SoC Development]     [Linux Rockchip Development]     [Linux USB Development]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Linux SCSI]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux