[PATCH 5/6] clk: stm32f469: Add QSPI clock

[Gabriel Fernandez]

Hi Rob,

Thanks for reviewing

On 10/08/2016 10:50 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 04:25:08PM +0200, gabriel.fernandez at st.com wrote:
>> From: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez at st.com>
>>
>> This patch adds the QSPI clock for stm32f469 discovery board.
>> The gate mapping is a little bit different from stm32f429 soc.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Gabriel Fernandez <gabriel.fernandez at st.com>
>> ---
>>   .../devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt     |   4 +-
>>   drivers/clk/clk-stm32f4.c                          | 173 ++++++++++++++++++---
>>   2 files changed, 158 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt
>> index fee3205..eace3de 100644
>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/clock/st,stm32-rcc.txt
>> @@ -8,7 +8,9 @@ Please also refer to clock-bindings.txt in this directory for common clock
>>   controller binding usage.
>>   
>>   Required properties:
>> -- compatible: Should be "st,stm32f42xx-rcc"
>> +- compatible: Should be:
>> +  "st,stm32f42xx-rcc"
>> +  "st,stm32f46xx-rcc"
> Generally, we don't use wildcards in compatible strings. I know there's
> lots of part numbers of stm32 parts which I guess are often same die
> with different fusing or package. Your compatible strings should be at
> least specific enough to identify parts that are really different die.
okay i will propose "st,stm32f469-rcc" if no one is against.

BR

Gabriel

>
>>   - reg: should be register base and length as documented in the
>>     datasheet
>>   - #clock-cells: 2, device nodes should specify the clock in their "clocks"