Hi Guys,
On 03/12/2013 06:03 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote:
> On Tuesday 12 March 2013 04:35 AM, Nishanth Menon wrote:
>> On certain SoCs like variants of OMAP, the clock conversion to DT
>> is not complete. In short, the ability to:
>> cpus {
>> cpu@0 {
>> clocks = <&cpuclk 0>;
>> };
>> };
>> is not possible. However, the clock node is registered.
>> Allow for clk names to be provided as string so as to be used when needed.
>> Example (for OMAP3630):
>> cpus {
>> cpu@0 {
>> clock-name = "cpufreq_ck";
>> };
>> };
>>
>> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <[email protected]>
>> Cc: Shawn Guo <[email protected]>
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>> Cc: [email protected]
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Menon <[email protected]>
>> ---
> Seems a reasonable to me.
No, it is not...
You cannot add a temp binding just because the OMAP support is not
there, since the real binding already exist.
You need to register properly a clock provider to be able to reference
it.
If you do need a hacky temp code you could do it in OMAP code but not in
the binding.
Regards,
Benoit
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
