From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (Boris BREZILLON)
Date: Wed, 14 May 2014 09:30:59 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v3 5/7] clk: sunxi: add PRCM (Power/Reset/Clock Management)
 clks support
In-Reply-To: <20140514005119.16152.19787@quantum>
References: <1399633911-7094-1-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
 <1399633911-7094-6-git-send-email-boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>
 <20140514005119.16152.19787@quantum>
Message-ID: <53731BB3.4060504@free-electrons.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hello Mike,

On 14/05/2014 02:51, Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Boris BREZILLON (2014-05-09 04:11:49)
>> +struct clk_ops ar100_ops = {
>> +       .recalc_rate = ar100_recalc_rate,
>> +       .determine_rate = ar100_determine_rate,
>> +       .set_parent = ar100_set_parent,
>> +       .get_parent = ar100_get_parent,
>> +       .set_rate = ar100_set_rate,
>> +};
> I might be having a brain fart, but is there a valid case for having
> both a .recalc_rate and a .determine_rate? I believe that the former
> will never be used and the latter will always be used by the clock
> framework core.

I think you're mistaking recalc_rate for round_rate.
AFAIK, recalc_rate is mandatory for a clk that implement either
round_rate or determine_rate.


Best Regards,

Boris

-- 
Boris Brezillon, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
http://free-electrons.com