On 11/7/2017 7:52 AM, Stefan Wahren wrote:
Hi,
Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> hat am 7. November 2017 um 03:18 geschrieben:
Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@xxxxxxxx> writes:
Simon Shields <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> hat am 4. November 2017 um 14:24 geschrieben:
Some boards use an external 32khz clock for low-power
mode timing. Make sure the clock is powered on while the chipset
is active.
Signed-off-by: Simon Shields <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
.../devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm43xx-fmac.txt | 2 ++
drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/common.h | 2 ++
drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/of.c | 5 +++++
drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c | 10 ++++++++++
4 files changed, 19 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm43xx-fmac.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm43xx-fmac.txt
index b2bd4704f859..37add5e29272 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm43xx-fmac.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/net/wireless/brcm,bcm43xx-fmac.txt
@@ -17,6 +17,8 @@ Optional properties:
When not specified the device will use in-band SDIO interrupts.
- interrupt-names : name of the out-of-band interrupt, which must be set
to "host-wake".
+ - clocks : external 32khz clock
+ - clock-names : name of the external 32khz clock, must be "32khz"
sorry for the nitpicking, but according to the datasheet [1] it's
32768 Hz. Apart from that i suggest to use a functional name for the
clock like "low_power" or something else, which is more flexible and
future-proof.
It is called LPO (low-power oscillator) in our documentation so my
suggestion would be "ext-lpo". The recommended value is 32*1024 Hz, but
it is not a must.
Btw this binding needs to be a separate patch, which should go to the
devicetree guys.
Previously I have applied binding documentation changes which the DT
maintainers have acked, that's why I specifically asked to Cc device
tree list. Has something changed?
as long as the changes has been acked this should be okay. I was referring to point 1 in this guideline [1].
Yeah. As happens regularly in requirements management only the
requirement is documented and not the motivation behind it.
Regards,
Arend
[1] - https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/submitting-patches.txt?h=v4.14-rc8
--
Kalle Valo
