Subject: Re: [PATCH] Device Tree Bindings for Freescale TDM controller

From: Scott Wood <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2012 12:32:36 -0500

On 03/17/2012 02:33 AM, Aggrwal Poonam-B10812 wrote:
>>> +  - compatible
>>> +      Usage: required
>>> +      Value type: <string>
>>> +      Definition: Should contain "fsl,mpc8315-tdm".
>>> +	  So mpc8313 will have compatible = "fsl,mpc8315-tdm";
>>> +	  p1010 will have compatible "fsl,p1010-tdm", "fsl,mpc8315-tdm";
>>
>> Shouldn't mpc8313 have:
>> compatible = "fsl,mpc8313-tdm", "fsl,mpc8315-tdm"?
>>
>> I thought we were going to use 8313 as the canonical implementation, not
>> 8315.
> MPC8315 was the first FSL platform to have this controller.
> MPC8313 does not have TDM.

OK, so no example for mpc8313 then. :-)

>> Will this frequency ever need to be > 4GHz?
> Don't think so, at max this will be CCB, not sure if CCB on our platforms may get bigger than 4G ever.

Still, I think we should always make clock-frequency properties be 32/64
as the ePAPR describes, just in case.

>> Might want to specify as u32 or u64, as ePAPR suggests.
> Means Value type: <u32 or u64>?

Yes.

> In this case the driver must always use 64bit data structure to read this. Is this correct?

No, you'd use of_read_number().  Maybe factor out an of_get_frequency().

-Scott