Subject: [PATCH 4/4] devicetree: bindings: qcom,mmcc: Document GDSC binding

From: [email-masked] (Stephen Boyd)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 14:16:35 -0700

On 04/29, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Stephen Boyd (2014-04-04 11:45:36)
> > +Example:
> > +       clock-controller at 4000000 {
> > +               compatible = "qcom,mmcc-msm8974";
> > +               reg = <0x4000000 0x1000>;
> > +               #clock-cells = <1>;
> > +               #reset-cells = <1>;
> > +
> > +               regulators {
> > +                       gdsc_oxili_gx: gdsc_oxili_gx {
> > +                               regulator-name = "gdsc_oxili_gx";
> 
> Hi Stephen,
> 
> It makes sense to model the gdsc's as regulators. It also makes sense to
> nest them within the clock-controller node, assuming that matches the
> register manual for your part.
> 
> However, does it make sense to put this new code under drivers/clk/qcom?
> I don't see a compelling reason. How about breaking the registers out
> into a header for easier reuse?

What registers are we talking about? I put this under
drivers/clk/qcom because it's one device that happens to have all
these different driver subsystems in it (clocks, reset, gdsc).

-- 
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation