>> +static unsigned long reg_save[][2] = {
>> + {ASS_CLK_SRC, 0},
>> + {ASS_CLK_DIV, 0},
>> + {ASS_CLK_GATE, 0},
>> +};
>> +
>> +/* list of all parent clock list */
>> +static const char *mout_audss_p[] = { "fin_pll", "fout_epll" };
>
> I think this is supposed to be "xxti" which might or might not be
> "fin_pll". In the exynos4 code these are two different clocks that
> are chosen by OM[0]. I'd bet that 99% of the time they are the same,
> but it seems better to use "xxti".
OM[0] also appears to mux the input here between "xxti" and "xusbxti"
as well. So this should probably remain "fin_pll".
> At the moment the 5250 code doesn't expose "xxti". It probably
> should. Andrew (CCed) is looking at this.
Yes, xxti is used directly elsewhere (SPI and UART, from what I can
tell), but not here.
-Andrew
--
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
