From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
To: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa@the-dreams.de>,
SH-Linux <linux-sh@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add i2c clocks
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 19:13:18 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52B1BB8E.9000008@cogentembedded.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANqRtoQ953DA-=DFXvkuLMJ6SBvobQdg5LByScPb+x84TJKkCA@mail.gmail.com>
Hello.
On 18-12-2013 18:44, Magnus Damm wrote:
>>>>>>>> @@ -173,6 +179,10 @@ static struct clk_lookup lookups[] = {
>>>>>>>> CLKDEV_CON_ID("mtu2_fck", &mstp_clks[MSTP33]),
>>>>>>>> /* ICK */
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee000.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP97]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee400.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP96]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee800.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP95]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfeec00.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP94]),
>>>>>>> These belong to some other place, the group marked by /* ICK */
>>>>>>> is only for CLKDEV_ICK_ID().
>>>>>> So, I'll create a /* DEV */ prefix?
>>>>> I really don't know. Other places have /* MSTP */ comment in this
>>>>> case despite all clocks, CLKDEV_DEV_ID() and CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are
>>>>> really MSTP clocks. I considered the idea of separating
>>>>> CLKDEV_ICK_ID() under /* ICK */ comment silly from the very start
>>>>> but Simon didn't listen to me.
>>>> I am puzzled, too. ICK is a type of registration and not a clock domain.
>>>> Also, there is 'mtu2_fck' which is under ICK as well as MSTP? Looks
>>>> wrong. From what I understand now, removing the /* ICK */ comment would
>>>> be easiest and proper?
>>> I'm not sure that I really understand what all the fuss is about.
>>> As I understand things the convention that prevails for
>>> MSTP clocks under mach-shmobile is as follows:
>>> 1. Clocks not registered by CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
>>> under /* MSTP */ followed by:
>>> 2. Clocks registered using CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
>>> under /* ICK */
>>> I am unsure of the historical reason for this
>> Recent patches by Morimoto-san.
>>> but it does seem to be consistent.
>> No, it doesn't. These comments are *clearly* not consistent and should be
>> removed at least.
> Feel free to contribute patches!
Of course, in my copious free time. I was against these ICKy comments (and
the patches introducing them) in the first place but my opinion didn't count.
I'm not sure it will count if I go and submit the patches (but the time will
be lost).
WBR, Sergei
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add i2c clocks
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:13:18 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52B1BB8E.9000008@cogentembedded.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANqRtoQ953DA-=DFXvkuLMJ6SBvobQdg5LByScPb+x84TJKkCA@mail.gmail.com>
Hello.
On 18-12-2013 18:44, Magnus Damm wrote:
>>>>>>>> @@ -173,6 +179,10 @@ static struct clk_lookup lookups[] = {
>>>>>>>> CLKDEV_CON_ID("mtu2_fck", &mstp_clks[MSTP33]),
>>>>>>>> /* ICK */
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee000.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP97]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee400.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP96]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee800.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP95]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfeec00.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP94]),
>>>>>>> These belong to some other place, the group marked by /* ICK */
>>>>>>> is only for CLKDEV_ICK_ID().
>>>>>> So, I'll create a /* DEV */ prefix?
>>>>> I really don't know. Other places have /* MSTP */ comment in this
>>>>> case despite all clocks, CLKDEV_DEV_ID() and CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are
>>>>> really MSTP clocks. I considered the idea of separating
>>>>> CLKDEV_ICK_ID() under /* ICK */ comment silly from the very start
>>>>> but Simon didn't listen to me.
>>>> I am puzzled, too. ICK is a type of registration and not a clock domain.
>>>> Also, there is 'mtu2_fck' which is under ICK as well as MSTP? Looks
>>>> wrong. From what I understand now, removing the /* ICK */ comment would
>>>> be easiest and proper?
>>> I'm not sure that I really understand what all the fuss is about.
>>> As I understand things the convention that prevails for
>>> MSTP clocks under mach-shmobile is as follows:
>>> 1. Clocks not registered by CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
>>> under /* MSTP */ followed by:
>>> 2. Clocks registered using CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
>>> under /* ICK */
>>> I am unsure of the historical reason for this
>> Recent patches by Morimoto-san.
>>> but it does seem to be consistent.
>> No, it doesn't. These comments are *clearly* not consistent and should be
>> removed at least.
> Feel free to contribute patches!
Of course, in my copious free time. I was against these ICKy comments (and
the patches introducing them) in the first place but my opinion didn't count.
I'm not sure it will count if I go and submit the patches (but the time will
be lost).
WBR, Sergei
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com (Sergei Shtylyov)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add i2c clocks
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 19:13:18 +0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <52B1BB8E.9000008@cogentembedded.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANqRtoQ953DA-=DFXvkuLMJ6SBvobQdg5LByScPb+x84TJKkCA@mail.gmail.com>
Hello.
On 18-12-2013 18:44, Magnus Damm wrote:
>>>>>>>> @@ -173,6 +179,10 @@ static struct clk_lookup lookups[] = {
>>>>>>>> CLKDEV_CON_ID("mtu2_fck", &mstp_clks[MSTP33]),
>>>>>>>> /* ICK */
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee000.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP97]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee400.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP96]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee800.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP95]),
>>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfeec00.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP94]),
>>>>>>> These belong to some other place, the group marked by /* ICK */
>>>>>>> is only for CLKDEV_ICK_ID().
>>>>>> So, I'll create a /* DEV */ prefix?
>>>>> I really don't know. Other places have /* MSTP */ comment in this
>>>>> case despite all clocks, CLKDEV_DEV_ID() and CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are
>>>>> really MSTP clocks. I considered the idea of separating
>>>>> CLKDEV_ICK_ID() under /* ICK */ comment silly from the very start
>>>>> but Simon didn't listen to me.
>>>> I am puzzled, too. ICK is a type of registration and not a clock domain.
>>>> Also, there is 'mtu2_fck' which is under ICK as well as MSTP? Looks
>>>> wrong. From what I understand now, removing the /* ICK */ comment would
>>>> be easiest and proper?
>>> I'm not sure that I really understand what all the fuss is about.
>>> As I understand things the convention that prevails for
>>> MSTP clocks under mach-shmobile is as follows:
>>> 1. Clocks not registered by CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
>>> under /* MSTP */ followed by:
>>> 2. Clocks registered using CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together
>>> under /* ICK */
>>> I am unsure of the historical reason for this
>> Recent patches by Morimoto-san.
>>> but it does seem to be consistent.
>> No, it doesn't. These comments are *clearly* not consistent and should be
>> removed at least.
> Feel free to contribute patches!
Of course, in my copious free time. I was against these ICKy comments (and
the patches introducing them) in the first place but my opinion didn't count.
I'm not sure it will count if I go and submit the patches (but the time will
be lost).
WBR, Sergei
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-18 15:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 69+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-17 21:44 [PATCH 0/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add native i2c support Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` [PATCH 2/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add i2c clocks Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 11:38 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 11:38 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 11:38 ` Sergei Shtylyov
[not found] ` <52B1892B.1020806-M4DtvfQ/ZS1MRgGoP+s0PdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-18 11:43 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 11:43 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 11:43 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 11:53 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 11:53 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 11:53 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 12:15 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 12:15 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 12:15 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 13:49 ` Simon Horman
2013-12-18 13:49 ` Simon Horman
2013-12-18 13:49 ` Simon Horman
[not found] ` <20131218134914.GA32664-/R6kz+dDXgpPR4JQBCEnsQ@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-18 14:02 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 14:02 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 14:02 ` Sergei Shtylyov
[not found] ` <52B1AAE6.2020400-M4DtvfQ/ZS1MRgGoP+s0PdBPR1lH4CV8@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-18 14:44 ` Magnus Damm
2013-12-18 14:44 ` Magnus Damm
2013-12-18 14:44 ` Magnus Damm
2013-12-18 15:13 ` Sergei Shtylyov [this message]
2013-12-18 15:13 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 15:13 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 21:00 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 21:00 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 21:00 ` Wolfram Sang
[not found] ` <1387316678-10174-1-git-send-email-wsa-z923LK4zBo2bacvFa/9K2g@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-17 21:44 ` [PATCH 1/5] pinctrl: r7s72100: add riic groups Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
[not found] ` <1387316678-10174-2-git-send-email-wsa-z923LK4zBo2bacvFa/9K2g@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-17 21:47 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:47 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:47 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:48 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:48 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:48 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:44 ` [PATCH 3/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add nodes for i2c controllers to dtsi Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:55 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:55 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:55 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 22:13 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 22:13 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 22:13 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 22:16 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 22:16 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 22:16 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:44 ` [PATCH 5/5] i2c: riic: add driver Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-18 8:42 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-12-18 8:42 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-12-18 8:42 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2013-12-17 21:44 ` [PATCH 4/5] arm: shmobile: genmai: adapt dts to use native i2c driver Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
2013-12-17 21:44 ` Wolfram Sang
[not found] ` <1387316678-10174-5-git-send-email-wsa-z923LK4zBo2bacvFa/9K2g@public.gmane.org>
2013-12-17 21:57 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:57 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-17 21:57 ` Laurent Pinchart
2013-12-18 11:41 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 11:41 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2013-12-18 11:41 ` Sergei Shtylyov
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=52B1BB8E.9000008@cogentembedded.com \
--to=sergei.shtylyov@cogentembedded.com \
--cc=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/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.