linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: s.nawrocki@samsung.com (Sylwester Nawrocki)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH RFC v4 2/2] clk: Add handling of clk parent and rate assigned from DT
Date: Wed, 02 Apr 2014 12:18:37 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <533BE3FD.8070902@samsung.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140401163744.GE3842@kroah.com>

On 01/04/14 18:37, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 01, 2014 at 04:23:12PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
>> On 01/04/14 15:19, Ben Dooks wrote:
>>> On 31/03/14 21:06, Greg KH wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 06:41:56PM +0200, Sylwester Nawrocki wrote:
>> [...]
>>>>> I don't understand why you need the driver core to initialize this one
>>>>> type of thing?  That should be in a driver, or in a class, or at worse
>>>>> case, the platform code.
>>>>>
>>>>> What makes clocks so "unique" here?
>>
>> The reason I put it in the driver core was mainly to avoid having many
>> drivers doing same call to this initialization function.
>> I was considering moving it to the bus code, still there are several
>> buses for which it would need to be repeated.
> 
> "several" is how many?  2?  3?  10?

It would be mostly the platform and amba bus, but this clock defaults
could be useful also for i2c, spi. In general it's about not probable
devices which may be specified in devicetree.

> Please fix it "correctly" and don't put it in the driver core just
> because it seems easier that way.
> 
>> Maybe really_probe() is not a best place to put this, nonetheless
>> the requirements I could list were:
>>
>>  1. not involving individual drivers,
> 
> Why not?

I'd say because this thing can be often considered a platform detail
which would be better opaque to drivers. It's at the border of a device
and its integration within a platform.

>>  2. have such an initialization call done for all devices, irrespective
>>     of Linux bus or class type,
> 
> Why?  Do _all_ devices that Linux supports have this issue to be
> resolved?

Sorry, certainly not all devices. I think it's only related to the
non-probable devices which can be specified in DT.

>>  3. Handle errors properly, e.g. defer driver probing if a clock for
>>    a device is not yet available.
> 
> Then do it in the bus that controls that device, as it knows to defer
> probing at that point in time.

All right, that would also work. I suspect doing it for platform and
amba bus might be sufficient in the beginning.

>> One advantage I could see from making the call from within a device
>> driver is that a device could keep using the common DT bindings and
>> replace the common initialization function with a private one, if
>> there is a need for some quirks handled for a device. With approach
>> as in this patch it's difficult to override the default behaviour.
>> However then there is a question whether we strive for the clocks
>> management to be possibly kept away from device drivers.
>>
>>> I suppose the issue here is that a lot of drivers currently use
>>> clocks and a number of systems have badly setup default clock trees
>>> at start time.
>>>
>>> Mark Brown and others have argued that the management of clocks which
>>> is common to all devices should not live in the driver.
>>
>> True, motivation behind this patch series was also replacing custom
>> code in multiple drivers doing similar clock rate or parent setting
>> by a common code, using standardized DT binding.
> 
> Then put it in the bus that controls these broken devices / platforms.

OK, I'm going to put it in the bus code.

-- 
Thanks,
Sylwester

  parent reply	other threads:[~2014-04-02 10:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-03-31 16:41 [PATCH RFC v4 0/2] clk: Support for DT assigned clock parents and rates Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-03-31 16:41 ` [PATCH RFC v4 1/2] clk: Add function parsing arbitrary clock list DT property Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-03-31 16:41 ` [PATCH RFC v4 2/2] clk: Add handling of clk parent and rate assigned from DT Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-03-31 17:04   ` Ben Dooks
2014-04-01  6:23     ` Sascha Hauer
2014-04-01  9:31       ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-03-31 20:06   ` Greg KH
2014-04-01 13:19     ` Ben Dooks
2014-04-01 14:23       ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-04-01 16:37         ` Greg KH
2014-04-02  5:37           ` Sascha Hauer
2014-04-02 10:24             ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-04-02 10:18           ` Sylwester Nawrocki [this message]
2014-04-01 16:35       ` Greg KH
2014-04-02  8:01       ` Peter De Schrijver
2014-04-02 13:02         ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2014-04-01 13:15   ` Laurent Pinchart
2014-04-01 14:52     ` Sylwester Nawrocki

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=533BE3FD.8070902@samsung.com \
    --to=s.nawrocki@samsung.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).