[PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Tang Yuantian]

From: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>

Main changs include:
	- Clarified the clock nodes' version number
	- Fixed a issue in example

Singed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
index 24711af..d6cadef 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
@@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ Required properties:
 		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
 	* "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-2.0": for input system clock (v2.0).
 		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
+	Note: v1.0 and v2.0 are clock version which should align to
+	clockgen node's they belong to which is chassis version.
 - #clock-cells: From common clock binding. The number of cells in a
 	clock-specifier. Should be <0> for "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-[1,2].0"
 	clocks, or <1> for "fsl,qoriq-core-pll-[1,2].0" clocks.
@@ -85,7 +87,7 @@ Example for clock block and clock provider:
 			#clock-cells = <0>;
 			compatible = "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-1.0";
 			clock-output-names = "sysclk";
-		}
+		};
 
 		pll0: pll0@800 {
 			#clock-cells = <1>;
-- 
1.8.0


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Tang Yuantian]

From: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang@freescale.com>

Main changs include:
	- Clarified the clock nodes' version number
	- Fixed a issue in example

Singed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang@freescale.com>
---
 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
index 24711af..d6cadef 100644
--- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
+++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
@@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ Required properties:
 		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
 	* "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-2.0": for input system clock (v2.0).
 		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
+	Note: v1.0 and v2.0 are clock version which should align to
+	clockgen node's they belong to which is chassis version.
 - #clock-cells: From common clock binding. The number of cells in a
 	clock-specifier. Should be <0> for "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-[1,2].0"
 	clocks, or <1> for "fsl,qoriq-core-pll-[1,2].0" clocks.
@@ -85,7 +87,7 @@ Example for clock block and clock provider:
 			#clock-cells = <0>;
 			compatible = "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-1.0";
 			clock-output-names = "sysclk";
-		}
+		};
 
 		pll0: pll0@800 {
 			#clock-cells = <1>;
-- 
1.8.0

Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 10:02 +0800, Tang Yuantian wrote:
> From: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
> 
> Main changs include:
> 	- Clarified the clock nodes' version number
> 	- Fixed a issue in example
> 
> Singed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> index 24711af..d6cadef 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> @@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ Required properties:
>  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
>  	* "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-2.0": for input system clock (v2.0).
>  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> +	Note: v1.0 and v2.0 are clock version which should align to
> +	clockgen node's they belong to which is chassis version.

Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:

All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version to
which the chip complies.

Chassis Version		Example Chips
---------------		-------------
1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040


BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
"qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is
part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you know
if the chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to share a
driver?

-Scott


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 10:02 +0800, Tang Yuantian wrote:
> From: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang@freescale.com>
> 
> Main changs include:
> 	- Clarified the clock nodes' version number
> 	- Fixed a issue in example
> 
> Singed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang@freescale.com>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> index 24711af..d6cadef 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> @@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ Required properties:
>  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
>  	* "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-2.0": for input system clock (v2.0).
>  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> +	Note: v1.0 and v2.0 are clock version which should align to
> +	clockgen node's they belong to which is chassis version.

Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:

All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version to
which the chip complies.

Chassis Version		Example Chips
---------------		-------------
1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040


BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
"qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is
part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you know
if the chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to share a
driver?

-Scott

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: 2014年1月23日 星期四 8:44
> To: Tang Yuantian-B29983
> Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; galak@kernel.crashing.org; linuxppc-
> dev@lists.ozlabs.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; Kushwaha Prabhakar-
> B32579
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings
> 
> On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 10:02 +0800, Tang Yuantian wrote:
> > From: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang@freescale.com>
> >
> > Main changs include:
> > 	- Clarified the clock nodes' version number
> > 	- Fixed a issue in example
> >
> > Singed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang@freescale.com>
> > ---
> >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt | 4 +++-
> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > index 24711af..d6cadef 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > @@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ Required properties:
> >  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> >  	* "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-2.0": for input system clock (v2.0).
> >  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> > +	Note: v1.0 and v2.0 are clock version which should align to
> > +	clockgen node's they belong to which is chassis version.
> 
> Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> 
> All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version to
> which the chip complies.
> 
> Chassis Version		Example Chips
> ---------------		-------------
> 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> 
Better, I will update.

> 
> BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
> "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
> string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is part
> of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you know if the
> chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to share a driver?
> 
Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020? 
This driver has nothing to do with these boards. 
I have no idea about chassis v3. If it has similar clock tree, this driver can be shared.
Even the driver can't be used by v3, we can easily add v3 support since it has different
Compatible string.

Regards,
Yuantian

> -Scott
> 

_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]
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Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 20:47 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > Sent: 2014年1月23日 星期四 8:44
> > To: Tang Yuantian-B29983
> > Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; galak-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org; linuxppc-
> > dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org; devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org; Kushwaha Prabhakar-
> > B32579
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings
> > 
> > On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 10:02 +0800, Tang Yuantian wrote:
> > > From: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
> > >
> > > Main changs include:
> > > 	- Clarified the clock nodes' version number
> > > 	- Fixed a issue in example
> > >
> > > Singed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang-KZfg59tc24xl57MIdRCFDg@public.gmane.org>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt | 4 +++-
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > index 24711af..d6cadef 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > @@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ Required properties:
> > >  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> > >  	* "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-2.0": for input system clock (v2.0).
> > >  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> > > +	Note: v1.0 and v2.0 are clock version which should align to
> > > +	clockgen node's they belong to which is chassis version.
> > 
> > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > 
> > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version to
> > which the chip complies.
> > 
> > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > ---------------		-------------
> > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > 
> Better, I will update.
> 
> > 
> > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
> > "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
> > string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is part
> > of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you know if the
> > chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to share a driver?
> > 
> Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020? 

Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
They're mpc85xx-family chips.

In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see why
it doesn't make sense for the driver.

> This driver has nothing to do with these boards. 
> I have no idea about chassis v3. If it has similar clock tree, this driver can be shared.
> Even the driver can't be used by v3, we can easily add v3 support since it has different
> Compatible string.

The reason I mentioned it is that chassis v3 will involve ARM chips that
have their own interconnect rather than corenet.

-Scott


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Wed, 2014-01-22 at 20:47 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > Sent: 2014年1月23日 星期四 8:44
> > To: Tang Yuantian-B29983
> > Cc: Wood Scott-B07421; galak@kernel.crashing.org; linuxppc-
> > dev@lists.ozlabs.org; devicetree@vger.kernel.org; Kushwaha Prabhakar-
> > B32579
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings
> > 
> > On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 10:02 +0800, Tang Yuantian wrote:
> > > From: Tang Yuantian <yuantian.tang@freescale.com>
> > >
> > > Main changs include:
> > > 	- Clarified the clock nodes' version number
> > > 	- Fixed a issue in example
> > >
> > > Singed-off-by: Tang Yuantian <Yuantian.Tang@freescale.com>
> > > ---
> > >  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt | 4 +++-
> > >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > index 24711af..d6cadef 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/corenet-clock.txt
> > > @@ -54,6 +54,8 @@ Required properties:
> > >  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> > >  	* "fsl,qoriq-sysclk-2.0": for input system clock (v2.0).
> > >  		It takes parent's clock-frequency as its clock.
> > > +	Note: v1.0 and v2.0 are clock version which should align to
> > > +	clockgen node's they belong to which is chassis version.
> > 
> > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > 
> > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version to
> > which the chip complies.
> > 
> > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > ---------------		-------------
> > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > 
> Better, I will update.
> 
> > 
> > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
> > "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
> > string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is part
> > of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you know if the
> > chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to share a driver?
> > 
> Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020? 

Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
They're mpc85xx-family chips.

In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see why
it doesn't make sense for the driver.

> This driver has nothing to do with these boards. 
> I have no idea about chassis v3. If it has similar clock tree, this driver can be shared.
> Even the driver can't be used by v3, we can easily add v3 support since it has different
> Compatible string.

The reason I mentioned it is that chassis v3 will involve ARM chips that
have their own interconnect rather than corenet.

-Scott

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8", Size: 1760 bytes --]

> > > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > >
> > > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version
> > > to which the chip complies.
> > >
> > > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > > ---------------		-------------
> > > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > >
> > Better, I will update.
> >
> > >
> > > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
> > > "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
> > > string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is
> > > part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you
> > > know if the chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to
> share a driver?
> > >
> > Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020?
> 
> Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
> They're mpc85xx-family chips.
> 
> In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see why
> it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> 
So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
If something should change, that must be compatible string.

Regards,
Yuantian

> > This driver has nothing to do with these boards.
> > I have no idea about chassis v3. If it has similar clock tree, this
> driver can be shared.
> > Even the driver can't be used by v3, we can easily add v3 support
> > since it has different Compatible string.
> 
> The reason I mentioned it is that chassis v3 will involve ARM chips that
> have their own interconnect rather than corenet.
> 
> -Scott
> 

N‹§²æìr¸›yúèšØb²X¬¶Ç§vØ^–)Þº{.nÇ+‰·zøœzÚÞz)í…æèw*\x1fjg¬±¨\x1e¶‰šŽŠÝ¢j.ïÛ°\½½MŽúgjÌæa×\x02››–' ™©Þ¢¸\f¢·¦j:+v‰¨ŠwèjØm¶Ÿÿ¾\a«‘êçzZ+ƒùšŽŠÝ¢j"ú!¶i

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]

PiA+ID4gSW5zdGVhZCwgaG93IGFib3V0IGEgbm90ZSBsaWtlIHRoaXMgbmVhciB0aGUgdG9wIG9m
IHRoZSBmaWxlOg0KPiA+ID4NCj4gPiA+IEFsbCByZWZlcmVuY2VzIHRvICIxLjAiIGFuZCAiMi4w
IiByZWZlciB0byB0aGUgUW9ySVEgY2hhc3NpcyB2ZXJzaW9uDQo+ID4gPiB0byB3aGljaCB0aGUg
Y2hpcCBjb21wbGllcy4NCj4gPiA+DQo+ID4gPiBDaGFzc2lzIFZlcnNpb24JCUV4YW1wbGUgQ2hp
cHMNCj4gPiA+IC0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQkJLS0tLS0tLS0tLS0tLQ0KPiA+ID4gMS4wCQkJcDQw
ODAsIHA1MDIwLCBwNTA0MA0KPiA+ID4gMi4wCQkJdDQyNDAsIGI0ODYwLCB0MTA0MA0KPiA+ID4N
Cj4gPiBCZXR0ZXIsIEkgd2lsbCB1cGRhdGUuDQo+ID4NCj4gPiA+DQo+ID4gPiBCVFcsIHRoaXMg
YmluZGluZyBhbmQgdGhlIGFzc29jaWF0ZWQgZHJpdmVyIHJlYWxseSBzaG91bGQgYmUgY2FsbGVk
DQo+ID4gPiAicW9yaXEtY2xvY2siLCBub3QgImNvcmVuZXQtY2xvY2siLiAgVGhpcyB3b3VsZCBt
YXRjaCB0aGUgY29tcGF0aWJsZQ0KPiA+ID4gc3RyaW5nLCBhbmQgaXQgZG9lc24ndCByZWFsbHkg
aGF2ZSBtdWNoIHRvIGRvIHdpdGggY29yZW5ldCAod2hpY2ggaXMNCj4gPiA+IHBhcnQgb2YgdGhl
IFFvcklRIGNoYXNzaXMgdjEgYW5kIHYyLCBidXQgbm90ICp0aGlzKiBwYXJ0KS4gIERvIHlvdQ0K
PiA+ID4ga25vdyBpZiB0aGUgY2hhc3NpcyB2MyBjbG9jayBpbnRlcmZhY2Ugd2lsbCBiZSBzaW1p
bGFyIGVub3VnaCB0bw0KPiBzaGFyZSBhIGRyaXZlcj8NCj4gPiA+DQo+ID4gRG9lc24ndCBRb3JJ
USBpbmNsdWRlIHNvbWUgbG93LWVuZCBzb2NzLCBsaWtlIHAxMDIyLCBwMTAyMD8NCj4gDQo+IFll
cywgYnV0IHRob3NlIGFyZW4ndCAiUW9ySVEgQ2hhc3NpcyAxLjAiIG9yICJRb3JJUSBDaGFzc2lz
IDIuMCIuDQo+IFRoZXkncmUgbXBjODV4eC1mYW1pbHkgY2hpcHMuDQo+IA0KPiBJbiBhbnkgY2Fz
ZSwgaWYgInFvcmlxIiBtYWtlcyBzZW5zZSBmb3IgdGhlIGNvbXBhdGlibGUsIEkgZG9uJ3Qgc2Vl
IHdoeQ0KPiBpdCBkb2Vzbid0IG1ha2Ugc2Vuc2UgZm9yIHRoZSBkcml2ZXIuDQo+IA0KU28sICJD
b3JlbmV0IiBpcyBhcHByb3ByaWF0ZSBmb3IgZHJpdmVyLg0KSWYgc29tZXRoaW5nIHNob3VsZCBj
aGFuZ2UsIHRoYXQgbXVzdCBiZSBjb21wYXRpYmxlIHN0cmluZy4NCg0KUmVnYXJkcywNCll1YW50
aWFuDQoNCj4gPiBUaGlzIGRyaXZlciBoYXMgbm90aGluZyB0byBkbyB3aXRoIHRoZXNlIGJvYXJk
cy4NCj4gPiBJIGhhdmUgbm8gaWRlYSBhYm91dCBjaGFzc2lzIHYzLiBJZiBpdCBoYXMgc2ltaWxh
ciBjbG9jayB0cmVlLCB0aGlzDQo+IGRyaXZlciBjYW4gYmUgc2hhcmVkLg0KPiA+IEV2ZW4gdGhl
IGRyaXZlciBjYW4ndCBiZSB1c2VkIGJ5IHYzLCB3ZSBjYW4gZWFzaWx5IGFkZCB2MyBzdXBwb3J0
DQo+ID4gc2luY2UgaXQgaGFzIGRpZmZlcmVudCBDb21wYXRpYmxlIHN0cmluZy4NCj4gDQo+IFRo
ZSByZWFzb24gSSBtZW50aW9uZWQgaXQgaXMgdGhhdCBjaGFzc2lzIHYzIHdpbGwgaW52b2x2ZSBB
Uk0gY2hpcHMgdGhhdA0KPiBoYXZlIHRoZWlyIG93biBpbnRlcmNvbm5lY3QgcmF0aGVyIHRoYW4g
Y29yZW5ldC4NCj4gDQo+IC1TY290dA0KPiANCg0K

Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:33 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > > > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > > >
> > > > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version
> > > > to which the chip complies.
> > > >
> > > > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > > > ---------------		-------------
> > > > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > > > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > > >
> > > Better, I will update.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
> > > > "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
> > > > string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is
> > > > part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you
> > > > know if the chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to
> > share a driver?
> > > >
> > > Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020?
> > 
> > Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
> > They're mpc85xx-family chips.
> > 
> > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see why
> > it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> > 
> So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
> If something should change, that must be compatible string.

No.  Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse of
the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot).  And the binding with qoriq
has already been accepted.

-Scott


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:33 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > > > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > > >
> > > > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis version
> > > > to which the chip complies.
> > > >
> > > > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > > > ---------------		-------------
> > > > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > > > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > > >
> > > Better, I will update.
> > >
> > > >
> > > > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be called
> > > > "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the compatible
> > > > string, and it doesn't really have much to do with corenet (which is
> > > > part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not *this* part).  Do you
> > > > know if the chassis v3 clock interface will be similar enough to
> > share a driver?
> > > >
> > > Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020?
> > 
> > Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
> > They're mpc85xx-family chips.
> > 
> > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see why
> > it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> > 
> So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
> If something should change, that must be compatible string.

No.  Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse of
the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot).  And the binding with qoriq
has already been accepted.

-Scott

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wood Scott-B07421
> Sent: 2014年1月24日 星期五 10:36
> To: Tang Yuantian-B29983
> Cc: galak@kernel.crashing.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org;
> devicetree@vger.kernel.org; Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings
> 
> On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:33 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > > > > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > > > >
> > > > > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis
> > > > > version to which the chip complies.
> > > > >
> > > > > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > > > > ---------------		-------------
> > > > > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > > > > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > > > >
> > > > Better, I will update.
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be
> > > > > called "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the
> > > > > compatible string, and it doesn't really have much to do with
> > > > > corenet (which is part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not
> > > > > *this* part).  Do you know if the chassis v3 clock interface
> > > > > will be similar enough to
> > > share a driver?
> > > > >
> > > > Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020?
> > >
> > > Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
> > > They're mpc85xx-family chips.
> > >
> > > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see
> > > why it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> > >
> > So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
> > If something should change, that must be compatible string.
> 
> No.  Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse of
> the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot).  And the binding with qoriq
> has already been accepted.
> 
QorIQ is not the best name either since it include the low-end socs.
What the name should be? 

Regards,
Yuantian

> -Scott
> 

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]
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Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:46 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > Sent: 2014年1月24日 星期五 10:36
> > To: Tang Yuantian-B29983
> > Cc: galak-XVmvHMARGAS8U2dJNN8I7kB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org; linuxppc-dev-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org;
> > devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org; Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings
> > 
> > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:33 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > > > > > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis
> > > > > > version to which the chip complies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > > > > > ---------------		-------------
> > > > > > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > > > > > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > > > > >
> > > > > Better, I will update.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be
> > > > > > called "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the
> > > > > > compatible string, and it doesn't really have much to do with
> > > > > > corenet (which is part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not
> > > > > > *this* part).  Do you know if the chassis v3 clock interface
> > > > > > will be similar enough to
> > > > share a driver?
> > > > > >
> > > > > Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
> > > > They're mpc85xx-family chips.
> > > >
> > > > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see
> > > > why it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> > > >
> > > So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
> > > If something should change, that must be compatible string.
> > 
> > No.  Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse of
> > the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot).  And the binding with qoriq
> > has already been accepted.
> > 
> QorIQ is not the best name either since it include the low-end socs.
> What the name should be? 

Again, those low-end chips do not implement "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or
"QorIQ Chassis 2.0".  That they have "QorIQ" in their name is
irrelevant.

-Scott


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Scott Wood]

On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:46 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wood Scott-B07421
> > Sent: 2014年1月24日 星期五 10:36
> > To: Tang Yuantian-B29983
> > Cc: galak@kernel.crashing.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org;
> > devicetree@vger.kernel.org; Kushwaha Prabhakar-B32579
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings
> > 
> > On Thu, 2014-01-23 at 20:33 -0600, Tang Yuantian-B29983 wrote:
> > > > > > Instead, how about a note like this near the top of the file:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All references to "1.0" and "2.0" refer to the QorIQ chassis
> > > > > > version to which the chip complies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Chassis Version		Example Chips
> > > > > > ---------------		-------------
> > > > > > 1.0			p4080, p5020, p5040
> > > > > > 2.0			t4240, b4860, t1040
> > > > > >
> > > > > Better, I will update.
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > BTW, this binding and the associated driver really should be
> > > > > > called "qoriq-clock", not "corenet-clock".  This would match the
> > > > > > compatible string, and it doesn't really have much to do with
> > > > > > corenet (which is part of the QorIQ chassis v1 and v2, but not
> > > > > > *this* part).  Do you know if the chassis v3 clock interface
> > > > > > will be similar enough to
> > > > share a driver?
> > > > > >
> > > > > Doesn't QorIQ include some low-end socs, like p1022, p1020?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, but those aren't "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ Chassis 2.0".
> > > > They're mpc85xx-family chips.
> > > >
> > > > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't see
> > > > why it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> > > >
> > > So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
> > > If something should change, that must be compatible string.
> > 
> > No.  Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse of
> > the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot).  And the binding with qoriq
> > has already been accepted.
> > 
> QorIQ is not the best name either since it include the low-end socs.
> What the name should be? 

Again, those low-end chips do not implement "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or
"QorIQ Chassis 2.0".  That they have "QorIQ" in their name is
irrelevant.

-Scott

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]

> > > > > In any case, if "qoriq" makes sense for the compatible, I don't
> > > > > see why it doesn't make sense for the driver.
> > > > >
> > > > So, "Corenet" is appropriate for driver.
> > > > If something should change, that must be compatible string.
> > >
> > > No.  Corenet is a bus interconnect, not a chip family (despite abuse
> > > of the name in other contexts in Linux/U-Boot).  And the binding
> > > with qoriq has already been accepted.
> > >
> > QorIQ is not the best name either since it include the low-end socs.
> > What the name should be?
> 
> Again, those low-end chips do not implement "QorIQ Chassis 1.0" or "QorIQ
> Chassis 2.0".  That they have "QorIQ" in their name is irrelevant.
> 
Got it. 

Regards,
Yuantian

> -Scott
> 

RE: [PATCH] clk: corenet: Update the clock bindings

[Yuantian Tang]
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