From: james.hogan@imgtec.com (James Hogan)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 0/3] clk: implement remuxing during set_rate
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 22:01:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5192A61E.5020605@imgtec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130514165937.10068.18501@quantum>
Hi Mike,
On 14/05/13 17:59, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting James Hogan (2013-05-13 14:30:46)
>> On 13 May 2013 20:57, Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> One reason for this is the difficulty some have had with setting flags
>>> from DT bindings.
>>
>> Could you elaborate on this? I've been adding flags to DT bindings for
>> this sort of thing, but it feels a bit like it's in that grey area of
>> not really describing the hardware itself. This information needs to
>> be specified somehow though.
>>
>
> It depends on the flag. A good example is the CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED
> flag which does describe the hardware. It informs the binding that
> indexing starts at 1, not 0, which is a valid part of the hardware
> description.
>
> However flags that deal with software policy do not belong on DT.
> CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT certainly does not belong in the DT binding since
> this is a pure Linux-ism. Every binding just needs to be reviewed on a
> case-by-case basis to make sure the flags are related only to the
> hardware.
So given the desire to eliminate platform code, is there a particular
way that these other flags can be specified instead of DT bindings?
Cheers
James
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: James Hogan <james.hogan@imgtec.com>
To: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
Cc: <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] clk: implement remuxing during set_rate
Date: Tue, 14 May 2013 22:01:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5192A61E.5020605@imgtec.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130514165937.10068.18501@quantum>
Hi Mike,
On 14/05/13 17:59, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting James Hogan (2013-05-13 14:30:46)
>> On 13 May 2013 20:57, Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> One reason for this is the difficulty some have had with setting flags
>>> from DT bindings.
>>
>> Could you elaborate on this? I've been adding flags to DT bindings for
>> this sort of thing, but it feels a bit like it's in that grey area of
>> not really describing the hardware itself. This information needs to
>> be specified somehow though.
>>
>
> It depends on the flag. A good example is the CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED
> flag which does describe the hardware. It informs the binding that
> indexing starts at 1, not 0, which is a valid part of the hardware
> description.
>
> However flags that deal with software policy do not belong on DT.
> CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT certainly does not belong in the DT binding since
> this is a pure Linux-ism. Every binding just needs to be reviewed on a
> case-by-case basis to make sure the flags are related only to the
> hardware.
So given the desire to eliminate platform code, is there a particular
way that these other flags can be specified instead of DT bindings?
Cheers
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-14 21:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-19 16:28 [PATCH v2 0/3] clk: implement remuxing during set_rate James Hogan
2013-04-19 16:28 ` James Hogan
2013-04-19 16:28 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] clk: abstract parent cache James Hogan
2013-04-19 16:28 ` James Hogan
2013-05-13 20:01 ` Mike Turquette
2013-05-13 20:01 ` Mike Turquette
2013-04-19 16:28 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] clk: add support for clock reparent on set_rate James Hogan
2013-04-19 16:28 ` James Hogan
2013-05-09 20:01 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-05-09 20:01 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-05-10 10:41 ` James Hogan
2013-05-10 10:41 ` James Hogan
2013-05-14 18:13 ` Mike Turquette
2013-05-14 18:13 ` Mike Turquette
2013-05-14 20:35 ` James Hogan
2013-05-14 20:35 ` James Hogan
2013-04-19 16:28 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] clk: clk-mux: implement remuxing " James Hogan
2013-04-19 16:28 ` James Hogan
2013-05-08 23:36 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] clk: implement remuxing during set_rate Stephen Boyd
2013-05-08 23:36 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-05-09 3:50 ` Saravana Kannan
2013-05-09 3:50 ` Saravana Kannan
2013-05-09 9:02 ` James Hogan
2013-05-09 9:02 ` James Hogan
2013-05-09 19:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-05-09 19:48 ` Stephen Boyd
2013-05-10 10:43 ` James Hogan
2013-05-10 10:43 ` James Hogan
2013-05-13 19:57 ` Mike Turquette
2013-05-13 19:57 ` Mike Turquette
2013-05-13 21:30 ` James Hogan
2013-05-13 21:30 ` James Hogan
2013-05-14 16:59 ` Mike Turquette
2013-05-14 21:01 ` James Hogan [this message]
2013-05-14 21:01 ` James Hogan
2013-05-14 22:15 ` Mike Turquette
2013-05-16 4:11 ` Saravana Kannan
2013-05-16 4:11 ` Saravana Kannan
2013-05-16 9:25 ` James Hogan
2013-05-16 9:25 ` James Hogan
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=5192A61E.5020605@imgtec.com \
--to=james.hogan@imgtec.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.