Review Request: New proposal for device tree clock binding.

[Grant Likely]

On Mon, Aug 9, 2010 at 10:56 PM, Li Yang-R58472 <r58472 at freescale.com> wrote:
>>>> I've avoided requiring clock nodes to have a separate sub node for
>>>> each output because it is more verbose and it prevents clock
>>>> providers from having child nodes for other purposes.  Are you
>>>> concerned that
>>>
>>> I don't see why there should be child nodes for other purposes under
>>clock node.
>>>
>>>> having the <phandle>+output name pair will be difficult to manage?
>>>
>>> That's part of my concern.
>>
>>I was concerned about this too until I found precedence for doing the
>>exact same thing in the pci binding (and ePAPR).  Mixing phandle and a
>>string in this way doesn't bother me anymore.
>
> Where exactly can I get the sample code for handling this binding?

In my test-devicetree branch.  See the file drivers/of/clock.c[1] from
commit [2]:

[1] http://git.secretlab.ca/?p=linux-2.6.git;a=blob;f=drivers/of/clock.c;h=26bd70c293d3ec23cbef3f67e0853069b6c24dc0;hb=fadbfb859485148756533b28203b7b0188a17250
[2] http://git.secretlab.ca/?p=linux-2.6.git;a=commit;h=fadbfb859485148756533b28203b7b0188a17250

g.