Subject: [PATCH 17/29] ARM: orion5x: update I2C description at SoC level

From: [email-masked] (Sebastian Hesselbarth)
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 11:10:37 +0200

On 04/19/2014 09:38 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Dear Sebastian Hesselbarth,
> 
> On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 12:45:38 +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
>> On 04/13/2014 04:39 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>>> This commit fixes the Orion5x SoC definition to:
>>>
>>>   * Not define a clock-frequency, as it should be described on a
>>>     per-board basis.
>>>
>>>   * Declare the appropriate clock reference, so that the driver can do
>>>     correct divisors calculations for the I2C bus.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Petazzoni <[email-masked]>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/arm/boot/dts/orion5x.dtsi | 2 +-
>>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/arm/boot/dts/orion5x.dtsi b/arch/arm/boot/dts/orion5x.dtsi
>>> index f25ed91..ea6ec83 100644
>>> --- a/arch/arm/boot/dts/orion5x.dtsi
>>> +++ b/arch/arm/boot/dts/orion5x.dtsi
>>> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
>>>   				#address-cells = <1>;
>>>   				#size-cells = <0>;
>>>   				interrupts = <5>;
>>> -				clock-frequency = <100000>;
>>> +				clocks = <&core_clk 0>;
>>
>> I guess the 100kHz (<100000>) has been a bug? Please mention that in
>> the commit log, too.
> 
> Hum, the commit log already mentions that this property is typically
> place at the board level. What other information do you think should be
> present in the commit log?

Yeah, I realized that reading through on of the later patches.
clock-frequency above does not match clocks in this case. Please ignore
my comment about it.

Sebastian