[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get()
On 04/02/12 09:52, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 09:48:31AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> I hope we get a better clk_get() implementation with the unified struct
>> clk. Don't get me wrong, clkdev is a great improvement over open coding
>> clock framework stuff in each platform. But clkdev is really just
>> another platform specific implementation
> Utter crap. It is not platform specific.

It has compile-time platform hooks so it isn't entirely generic.

>> that most platforms decide to
>> use. Each platform has to select the option and it breaks if two
>> platforms implement __clk_get()/__clk_put() in conflicting ways.
> They should go away with the common clock stuff: they are there to deal
> with the implementation specific parts of struct clk, and as the common
> clock stuff sorts that out, these should be provided by the common clk.

Agreed. They should all be deleted and only one should exist.

> So any platform using the common clock will be compatible with any other
> platform using the common clock.
> If you somehow think that clkdev comes into that compatibility, you're
> wrong. It doesn't.

I don't.

> And if you think that a private clk implementation could have a unified
> clk_get(), you're also barking mad.

I don't understand this. Maybe I'm barking mad already.

Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.

 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-02 19:07    [W:0.044 / U:7.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site