From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: rnayak@codeaurora.org (Rajendra Nayak)
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:58:45 +0530
Subject: [PATCH v6 03/13] clk: qcom: gdsc: Use PM clocks to control gdsc
 clocks
In-Reply-To: <55B0B255.9050803@mm-sol.com>
References: <1437549069-29655-1-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org>
 <1437549069-29655-4-git-send-email-rnayak@codeaurora.org>
 <55B03CE9.4050903@codeaurora.org> <55B0A710.9080209@codeaurora.org>
 <55B0B255.9050803@mm-sol.com>
Message-ID: <55B0C1DD.3080908@codeaurora.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org



On 07/23/2015 02:52 PM, Stanimir Varbanov wrote:
> On 07/23/2015 11:34 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>> On 07/23/2015 06:31 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>> On 07/22/2015 12:10 AM, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
>>>> @@ -104,6 +105,37 @@ static int gdsc_disable(struct generic_pm_domain
>>>> *domain)
>>>>        return gdsc_toggle_logic(sc, false);
>>>>    }
>>>> +static int gdsc_attach(struct generic_pm_domain *domain, struct
>>>> device *dev)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    int ret;
>>>> +    struct gdsc *sc = domain_to_gdsc(domain);
>>>> +    char **con_id, *con_ids[] = { "core", "iface", NULL };
>>>
>>> const?
>>>
>>> This is where I get scared of sniffing too much SoC glue. What's to
>>> enforce the "core", and "iface" naming scheme? What's to enforce there
>>> being two clocks vs. one? Maybe a better approach would be to use
>>> of_clk_get() and iterate through all clocks of the device, or to encode
>>> the clock names in the gdsc structure.
>>
>> I had the clock names in the gdsc structure in v5. I should probably go
>> back to having it that way.
>
> Rajendra, If you decide to go back please look at that comment [1], as well.

yes, thanks, I will.