From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get()
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 16:34:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120401153450.GC8971@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F787392.5040308@codeaurora.org>
On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 08:26:10AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 4/1/2012 4:32 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Documentation/driver-model/devres.txt | 3 +++
> > drivers/clk/clkdev.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/clk.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> But why is this part of clkdev.c? devm_clk_get() should work regardless
> of the implementation of clk_get() so can we put it into some other file
> that is compiled if HAVE_CLK=y so everyone benefits from this and not
> just users who select CLKDEV_LOOKUP?
Mostly just because clk_get() is part of clkdev.c and I didn't feel like
creating a new file, though also because I really hope that we're going
to be moving away from open coding clock framework things so that we can
start to push clock API usage into non-SoC code. Things like adding new
clocks are going to be a part of that.
To put it another way, why would a platform want to avoid clkdev?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20120401/9bba3e11/attachment-0001.sig>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@ti.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get()
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 16:34:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120401153450.GC8971@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F787392.5040308@codeaurora.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1019 bytes --]
On Sun, Apr 01, 2012 at 08:26:10AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 4/1/2012 4:32 AM, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Documentation/driver-model/devres.txt | 3 +++
> > drivers/clk/clkdev.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > include/linux/clk.h | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> > 3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> But why is this part of clkdev.c? devm_clk_get() should work regardless
> of the implementation of clk_get() so can we put it into some other file
> that is compiled if HAVE_CLK=y so everyone benefits from this and not
> just users who select CLKDEV_LOOKUP?
Mostly just because clk_get() is part of clkdev.c and I didn't feel like
creating a new file, though also because I really hope that we're going
to be moving away from open coding clock framework things so that we can
start to push clock API usage into non-SoC code. Things like adding new
clocks are going to be a part of that.
To put it another way, why would a platform want to avoid clkdev?
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-01 15:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-01 11:32 [PATCH 1/2] clk: Fix comment for end of CONFIG_COMMON_CLK section Mark Brown
2012-04-01 11:32 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-01 11:32 ` [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get() Mark Brown
2012-04-01 11:32 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-01 15:26 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-01 15:26 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-01 15:34 ` Mark Brown [this message]
2012-04-01 15:34 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 16:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 16:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 16:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 16:52 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:04 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 17:04 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 17:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 17:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 17:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:34 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 17:34 ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 18:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 18:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:16 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 17:16 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 17:30 ` Turquette, Mike
2012-04-02 17:30 ` Turquette, Mike
2012-04-02 17:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:04 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:34 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 17:34 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 18:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 18:05 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-01 13:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] clk: Fix comment for end of CONFIG_COMMON_CLK section Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-01 13:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-01 14:29 ` Mark Brown
2012-04-01 14:29 ` Mark Brown
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120401153450.GC8971@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.