diff for duplicates of <20151020162939.20687.32769@quantum> diff --git a/a/1.txt b/N1/1.txt index 94ecbd1..0aa11e1 100644 --- a/a/1.txt +++ b/N1/1.txt @@ -1,74 +1,59 @@ Quoting Maxime Ripard (2015-10-20 07:40:47) > Hi Mike, -> = - +> > On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 06:43:43AM -0700, Michael Turquette wrote: > > Hi Maxime, -> > = - +> > > > Quoting Maxime Ripard (2015-10-20 00:36:45) -> > > +struct clk *clk_register_multiplier(struct device *dev, const char *= -name, +> > > +struct clk *clk_register_multiplier(struct device *dev, const char *name, > > > + const char *parent_name, > > > + unsigned long flags, -> > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 shift, u8 w= -idth, -> > > + u8 clk_mult_flags, spinlock_t *lo= -ck) +> > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 shift, u8 width, +> > > + u8 clk_mult_flags, spinlock_t *lock) > > > +{ -> > = - +> > > > Patch looks good in general. However this is a good opportunity to stop > > the madness around the registration functions in these basic clock > > types. -> > = - +> > > > clk_register is really all that we need since we've had struct > > clk_init_data for a while. Initializing a multiplier should be as simple > > as: -> > = - -> > struct clk_multiplier clk_foo =3D { -> > .hw.init =3D &(struct clk_init_data){ -> > .name =3D "foo", -> > .parent_names =3D (const char *[]){ +> > +> > struct clk_multiplier clk_foo = { +> > .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){ +> > .name = "foo", +> > .parent_names = (const char *[]){ > > "bar", > > }, -> > .num_parents =3D 1; -> > .ops =3D &clk_multiplier_ops, +> > .num_parents = 1; +> > .ops = &clk_multiplier_ops, > > }, -> > .reg =3D 0xd34db33f, -> > .shift =3D 1, -> > .width =3D 2, +> > .reg = 0xd34db33f, +> > .shift = 1, +> > .width = 2, > > }; -> > = - +> > > > clk_register(dev, &clk_foo.hw); -> > = - +> > > > This is nice since it turns these basic clocks into even more of a > > library and less of a poor mans driver. -> > = - +> > > > (I really hope the above works. I did not test it) -> > = - +> > > > Is it possible you can convert to using this method, and if it is > > correct for you then just remove clk_multiplier_register altogether? (In > > fact you might not use the registration function at all since you use > > the composite clock...) -> = - +> > This chunk of code has been here since v2, which has been first posted > in May, two and half kernel releases ago. -> = - +> > In the meantime, we had a full-blown DMA driver and a quite unusual > ASoC driver merged. For some reason, this is the only piece of the > audio support that is missing for us, while at the same time it's the > most trivial. -> = - +> > If that's the only issue you have with this patch, I'm fine with > sending a subsequent patch this week. But I'd be really unhappy with > sending yet another version for a single change, while you had 5 @@ -92,13 +77,10 @@ I can pick these 5 patches directly, or do you plan to send a PR? Regards, Mike -> = - +> > Maxime -> = - -> -- = - +> +> -- > Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons > Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering > http://free-electrons.com diff --git a/a/content_digest b/N1/content_digest index 52e5e8b..8f90436 100644 --- a/a/content_digest +++ b/N1/content_digest @@ -2,91 +2,68 @@ "ref\01445326609-6314-2-git-send-email-maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com\0" "ref\020151020134343.20687.16333@quantum\0" "ref\020151020144047.GA10947@lukather\0" - "From\0Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>\0" - "Subject\0Re: [PATCH v6 1/5] clk: Add a basic multiplier clock\0" + "From\0mturquette@baylibre.com (Michael Turquette)\0" + "Subject\0[PATCH v6 1/5] clk: Add a basic multiplier clock\0" "Date\0Tue, 20 Oct 2015 09:29:39 -0700\0" - "To\0Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>" - "\0" - "Cc\0Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>" - Emilio Lopez <emilio@elopez.com.ar> - linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org - linux-clk@vger.kernel.org - Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org> - Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> - " linux-sunxi@googlegroups.com\0" + "To\0linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org\0" "\00:1\0" "b\0" "Quoting Maxime Ripard (2015-10-20 07:40:47)\n" "> Hi Mike,\n" - "> =\n" - "\n" + "> \n" "> On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 06:43:43AM -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:\n" "> > Hi Maxime,\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" + "> > \n" "> > Quoting Maxime Ripard (2015-10-20 00:36:45)\n" - "> > > +struct clk *clk_register_multiplier(struct device *dev, const char *=\n" - "name,\n" + "> > > +struct clk *clk_register_multiplier(struct device *dev, const char *name,\n" "> > > + const char *parent_name,\n" "> > > + unsigned long flags,\n" - "> > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 shift, u8 w=\n" - "idth,\n" - "> > > + u8 clk_mult_flags, spinlock_t *lo=\n" - "ck)\n" + "> > > + void __iomem *reg, u8 shift, u8 width,\n" + "> > > + u8 clk_mult_flags, spinlock_t *lock)\n" "> > > +{\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" + "> > \n" "> > Patch looks good in general. However this is a good opportunity to stop\n" "> > the madness around the registration functions in these basic clock\n" "> > types.\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" + "> > \n" "> > clk_register is really all that we need since we've had struct\n" "> > clk_init_data for a while. Initializing a multiplier should be as simple\n" "> > as:\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" - "> > struct clk_multiplier clk_foo =3D {\n" - "> > .hw.init =3D &(struct clk_init_data){\n" - "> > .name =3D \"foo\",\n" - "> > .parent_names =3D (const char *[]){\n" + "> > \n" + "> > struct clk_multiplier clk_foo = {\n" + "> > .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){\n" + "> > .name = \"foo\",\n" + "> > .parent_names = (const char *[]){\n" "> > \"bar\",\n" "> > },\n" - "> > .num_parents =3D 1;\n" - "> > .ops =3D &clk_multiplier_ops,\n" + "> > .num_parents = 1;\n" + "> > .ops = &clk_multiplier_ops,\n" "> > },\n" - "> > .reg =3D 0xd34db33f,\n" - "> > .shift =3D 1,\n" - "> > .width =3D 2,\n" + "> > .reg = 0xd34db33f,\n" + "> > .shift = 1,\n" + "> > .width = 2,\n" "> > };\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" + "> > \n" "> > clk_register(dev, &clk_foo.hw);\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" + "> > \n" "> > This is nice since it turns these basic clocks into even more of a\n" "> > library and less of a poor mans driver.\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" + "> > \n" "> > (I really hope the above works. I did not test it)\n" - "> > =\n" - "\n" + "> > \n" "> > Is it possible you can convert to using this method, and if it is\n" "> > correct for you then just remove clk_multiplier_register altogether? (In\n" "> > fact you might not use the registration function at all since you use\n" "> > the composite clock...)\n" - "> =\n" - "\n" + "> \n" "> This chunk of code has been here since v2, which has been first posted\n" "> in May, two and half kernel releases ago.\n" - "> =\n" - "\n" + "> \n" "> In the meantime, we had a full-blown DMA driver and a quite unusual\n" "> ASoC driver merged. For some reason, this is the only piece of the\n" "> audio support that is missing for us, while at the same time it's the\n" "> most trivial.\n" - "> =\n" - "\n" + "> \n" "> If that's the only issue you have with this patch, I'm fine with\n" "> sending a subsequent patch this week. But I'd be really unhappy with\n" "> sending yet another version for a single change, while you had 5\n" @@ -110,15 +87,12 @@ "Regards,\n" "Mike\n" "\n" - "> =\n" - "\n" + "> \n" "> Maxime\n" - "> =\n" - "\n" - "> -- =\n" - "\n" + "> \n" + "> -- \n" "> Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons\n" "> Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering\n" > http://free-electrons.com -816299c3a0e1b4e310b66dd3e5245b1596a3b650d893ff0443e9dbbf75f4e494 +1153dc2ca5970d10d9fd2e7d1ba417356ce018ae216bd6351045f476e6a2db8e
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.