From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: wsa@the-dreams.de (Wolfram Sang) Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2014 17:27:31 +0100 Subject: [PATCH 3/4] clk: shmobile: add CPG driver for rz-platforms In-Reply-To: <1722697.3h0GnbWuD3@avalon> References: <1393621768-12568-1-git-send-email-wsa@the-dreams.de> <1569751.q5lJmQcb3K@avalon> <20140303091903.GA6531@katana> <1722697.3h0GnbWuD3@avalon> Message-ID: <20140303162731.GA3732@katana> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org > While the parent is indeed selected at boot time only, and only one parent is > thus needed, parent selection could be performed by a DIP switch connected to > MD_CLK on the board for instance. In that case both parents should be > available in DT, as selection will be done by the kernel at boot time, not at > DT compile time. OK, I understand the case. I still wonder about specifying two parents, though. If a board uses USB_X1, it then has to spefify a dummy EXTAL clock (or an empty one), just because USB_X1 is enumerated as second entry? > > Again, now that I already coded it, what is the gain to remove it? The > > drawback is that other people might get encouraged to find reasons to > > allow them sloppy practices. > > It will make the kernel binary smaller by removing code that is not needed in > practice. Sounds like a micro-optimazation to me. If you insist, we should BUG() right away in that case, to make the code comprehensible. Returning with a leak and saying "we will probably fail somewhere" should really be avoided IMO. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: