On 13 June 2013 03:02, Andrew Bresticker <abrestic@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Tomasz,
>
>>> + apll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_apll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x100);
>>> + bpll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_bpll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x20110);
>>> + cpll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_cpll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10120);
>>> + dpll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_dpll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10128);
>>> + epll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_epll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10130);
>>> + ipll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_ipll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10150);
>>> + kpll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_kpll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x28100);
>>> + mpll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_mpll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10180);
>>> + rpll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_rpll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10140);
>>> + spll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_spll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10160);
>>> + vpll = samsung_clk_register_pll35xx("fout_vpll", "oscclk",
>>> + reg_base + 0x10170);
>>
>> Are all those PLLs really PLL35xx? At least for VPLL and EPLL a PLL
>> without the K factor looks a bit awkward.
>
> No they are not... EPLL and RPLL should be pll36xx, but the rest are pll35xx.
Yes EPLL and RPLL are pll36xx.
Thanks for pointing out.
>
> Thanks,
> Andrew
--
with warm regards,
Chander Kashyap
--
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
