2011/6/3 Barry Song <[email protected]>:
> 2011/6/3 Russell King - ARM Linux <[email protected]>:
>> On Thu, Jun 02, 2011 at 10:04:45AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
>>> Right now we can't do dynamic registration for on-chip devices in a
>>> lot of cases because we don't have the infrastructure to hook up the
>>> associated struct clks.
>>
>> I've been wondering about this, and I don't see it as a blocking problem
>> as you seem to be.
>>
>> I assume platform devices have stable names when they're created from
>> the device tree? If yes, there's no problem having the DT start to
>> describe the SoC specific devices _today_ - all that the clk API using
>> clkdev requires is a stable device name.
>
> when i write the following nodes in dts,
>
> uart0: uart@0xb0060000 {
> compatible = "sirf,uart";
> ...
> }
>
> uart1: uart@0xb0050000 {
> compatible = "sirf,uart";
> ...
> }
>
> uart2: uart@0xb0070000 {
> compatible = "sirf,uart";
> ...
> }
>
> then create these platform devices by of_platform_xxx things, i get
> some platform devices like the below.
>
> b0060000.uart
> b0050000.uart
> b0070000.uart
>
> so these are the "stable names" you are talking about? or something else?
if so, we will need some clk_lookup table like:
#define CLK(_clk, _devname, _conname) \
{ \
.clk = &clk_##_clk, \
.dev_id = _devname, \
.con_id = _conname, \
}
CLK(uart0, "b0060000.uart", NULL),
CLK(uart1, "b0050000.uart", NULL),
CLK(uart2, "b0070000.uart", NULL),
it looks not like what we want too.
>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
devicetree-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/devicetree-discuss
