[PATCH V5 2/4] arm/dt: add very basic dts file for babbage board

[Shawn Guo]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:43:34PM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 09:49:17AM +0800, Shawn Guo wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:42:38AM -0600, Grant Likely wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:51:39PM +0800, Jason Liu wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > +	aips at 83f00000 {
> > > > +		#address-cells = <1>;
> > > > +		#size-cells = <1>;
> > > > +		compatible = "simple-bus";
> > > > +		ranges = <0x0 0x83f00000 0x100000>;
> > > > +
> > > > +		fec at ec000 {
> > > > +			compatible = "fsl,imx51-fec";
> > > > +			reg = <0xec000 0x1000>;
> > > > +			interrupts = <0x57>;
> > > > +			fec_clk-clock = <&fec_clk>, "fec";
> > > 
> > > Unfortunately we're leaking Linux implementation details here by
> > > needing to use the name "fec_clk".  This will require some more
> > > thought on the best way to handle (but I'm not asking you to change
> > > anything yet).
> > > 
> > This constraint comes from function of_clk_get in drivers/of/clock.c:
> > 
> > struct clk *of_clk_get(struct device *dev, const char *id)
> > {
> > 	[...]
> >         dev_dbg(dev, "Looking up %s-clock from device tree\n", id);
> > 
> >         snprintf(prop_name, 32, "%s-clock", id ? id : "bus");
> >         prop = of_get_property(dev->of_node, prop_name, &sz);
> > 	[...]
> > }
> > 
> > The 'id' here is clk_lookup->con_id.  If we choose to use some fixed
> > prop name here, the name leaking Linux implementation like 'fec_clk'
> > will not need to be there.
> > 
> > What about fixing the name as 'bus-clock' used by the current
> > implementation, or 'module-clock', or anything you can think of
> > better?
> 
> Yeah, I though about that, but I'm being very careful about hard
> coding anything in the core DT code because every platform seems to
> want something different here, or want a different set of clocks.  I
> don't have a good solution for this yet.
> 
We are not hard coding anything but a property name here.  We are hard
coding property name everywhere in dt code, aren't we?

-- 
Regards,
Shawn