[PATCH V2 1/3] clk: samsung: register audio subsystem clocks using common clock framework
Sylwester Nawrocki
sylvester.nawrocki at gmail.com
Sat May 11 07:42:11 EDT 2013
Hi,
On 05/11/2013 12:13 PM, Padma Venkat wrote:
>>> +CLK_OF_DECLARE(exynos4210_audss_clk, "samsung,exynos4210-audss-clock",
>>> >> + samsung_audss_clk_init);
>>> >> +CLK_OF_DECLARE(exynos5250_audss_clk, "samsung,exynos5250-audss-clock",
>>> >> + samsung_audss_clk_init);
>> >
>> > Also if both Exynos4210 and Exynos5250 have exactly the same audss clock
>> > layout, there is no reason to have two compatibles for them - the
>> > convention is that just the first model that had this hardware is enough -
>> > in this case Exynos4210.
>> >
>> > Having two different compatibles suggests that those two SoCs differ in a
>> > way that needs special handling, which is misleading, based on the fact
>> > that there is no such special handling in the driver.
>
> There is only one difference between Exynos4 and Exynos5 is bit 1 of
> CLK_GATE register where in Exynos5 it is reserved and Exynos4 it is
> gate to IntMEM. I am not sure if we use this bit some where? So is it
> okey to have same compatible with this diff?
I think such difference warrants separate compatible properties, as
Exynos5250
seems to be not compatible with Exynos4210 in that case. Reserved bits
should
be left untouched.
I wouldn't be surprised to see more differences we might be overlooking
now.
IMHO it's better to be save than sorry, keeping both 'compatible'
strings as
they are now.
Regards,
Sylwester
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list