Hi Stephen,
On 20-04-2016 02:54, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 04/19, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> @Stephen: can you give some input so that I can submit a v6?
>>
> I don't prefer putting the second register in the same DT node,
> but that's really up to the DT reviewers to approve such a
> design. The current binding has been acked by Rob right?
Yes.
> Assuming the new binding is acked/reviewed then that solution is
> fine.
Ok, will then use the DT to pass the FPGA version register.
> Otherwise, I still prefer two DTS files for the two different FPGA
> versions. At the least, please use ioremap for any pointers that
> you readl/writel here.
>
> Beyond that, we should have a fixed rate source clk somewhere in
> the software view of the clk tree, because that reflects reality.
> Hardcoding the parent rate in the structure works, but doesn't
> properly express the clk tree.
>
Can I use a property in the DT to pass this reference clock? something like this:
snps,parent-freq = <0xFBED9 27000000>, <0x0 28224000>; /* Tuple
<fpga-version reference-clock-freq>, fpga-version = 0 is default */
Or use a parent clock? like:
clk {
compatible = "fixed-clock";
clock-frequency = <27000000>;
#clock-cells = <0>;
snps,fpga-version = <0xFBED9>;
}
It is important to distinguish between the different versions automatically, is
any of these solutions ok?
Best regards,
Jose Miguel Abreu
