All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get()
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 18:16:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120402171641.GF15197@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F79D85F.4020909@codeaurora.org>

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 that most platforms decide to
> use. Each platform has to select the option and it breaks if two

> Sticking devm_clk_get() into clkdev.c is simple, no new file, smaller
> diff. Great. But linking it to clkdev doesn't sound much better when
> we're trying to get rid of platform specific code and this code is
> entirely platform independent.

Why wouldn't we want to continue to use clkdev with the generic clock
framework?  There's nothing particularly wrong with clkdev and we need a
standard mechanism for doing this anyway.  Frankly I was very surprised
when I looked just now and realised that the generic framework doesn't
use it automatically, I might just send a patch for that...
-------------- 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/20120402/4c2b6896/attachment.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: Mon, 2 Apr 2012 18:16:42 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120402171641.GF15197@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4F79D85F.4020909@codeaurora.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1012 bytes --]

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 that most platforms decide to
> use. Each platform has to select the option and it breaks if two

> Sticking devm_clk_get() into clkdev.c is simple, no new file, smaller
> diff. Great. But linking it to clkdev doesn't sound much better when
> we're trying to get rid of platform specific code and this code is
> entirely platform independent.

Why wouldn't we want to continue to use clkdev with the generic clock
framework?  There's nothing particularly wrong with clkdev and we need a
standard mechanism for doing this anyway.  Frankly I was very surprised
when I looked just now and realised that the generic framework doesn't
use it automatically, I might just send a patch for that...

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-04-02 17:16 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
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 [this message]
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=20120402171641.GF15197@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.