Hi Magnus,
On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 11:21 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 7:05 AM, Magnus Damm <[email protected]> wrote:
>> From: Magnus Damm <[email protected]>
>>
>> This patch hacks the CCF core to take clock-indices into
>> consideration when making a default clock name in case
>> clock-output-names is not provided.
>>
>> Without this patch of_clk_get_parent_name() does not work
>> for clocks with multiple indices associated with one node.
>>
>> Proof of concept only. Leaks memory. Not for upstream merge.
>>
>> Not-Yet-Signed-off-by: Magnus Damm <[email protected]>
>
> While this (probably) solves the issue, is this something we want to do?
> What does we gain? E.g. we still need to allocate memory to store the clock
> names, so no memory is saved by not providing clock-output-names.
> But instead of useful names, the clocks now have autogenerated names, and all
> look the same (I don't know e.g. all 384 MSTP clock numbers by heart ;-)
Actually it's even worse: the autogenerated number is not the MSTP bit
number, which I can relate to the actual clock using
include/dt-bindings/clock/*.h, but the index in the sparse array of used bits,
which depends on how many MSTP clocks are defined in DT.
So we moved from e.g. "hscif1" through "mstp3.10" ("bit 10 in MSTP set 3",
aka "MSTP310") to "mstp3.0" ("the first clock defined in DT for MSTP set 3").
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- [email protected]
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-clk" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
