Re: [PATCH] clk: add flags to distinguish xtal clocks

From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
To: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
Cc: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>, <mturquette@linaro.org>,
	Linux ARM Kernel Mailing List 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<james.hogan@imgtec.com>, <luca@coelho.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: add flags to distinguish xtal clocks
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 13:43:55 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131111194355.GC19212@saruman.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5281058E.5050607@wwwdotorg.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1092 bytes --]

Hi,

On Mon, Nov 11, 2013 at 09:27:58AM -0700, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 11/08/2013 11:00 AM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> > From: Luciano Coelho <luca@coelho.fi>
> > 
> > Add a flag that indicate whether the clock is a crystal or not.
> > 
> > Additionally, parse a new device tree binding in clk-fixed-rate to set
> > this flag.
> > 
> > If clock-xtal isn't set, the clock framework will assume clock to be
> > generated by an oscillator.  There's only one user for this binding
> > right now which is Texas Instruments' WiLink devices which need to know
> > details about the clock in order to initialize the underlying WiFi HW
> > correctly.
> 
> Why on earth does it care? Surely the WiFi HW doesn't care about
> crystal-vs-non-crystal, but rather some facet of the clock signal that
> the type of source implies. Shouldn't the DT property describe that
> facet of the signal, rather than the reason why it has that facet?

well, if you can figure out what that facet is, then _do_ tell. Luca has
tried for months to get that information with no success.

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]