Re: [RFD] Functional dependencies between devices

[Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@samsung.com>]

On 11/21/2015 03:04 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 07:50:45AM +0100, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
>> On 11/17/2015 02:55 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>>> This is going to be really common but I'm not sure I see a problem with
>>> it in terms of what Raphael is proposing - could you go into more detail
>>> on the problem you see here?
>> If clock provider is not a device driver and it depends on clocks of
>> another clock
>> provider you cannot 'translate' this dependency as dependency between
>> devices,
> What makes you say that this is the case?  There should be nothing
> stopping us having dependencies between two devices of the same type.

To be clear I described situation that one clock provider uses clock
of another clock provider and consumer is not modeled as device.


>
>> so this RFD does not cover them.
>> Additionally if you look into kernel there are many calls in form
>> 'clk_get(NULL, name)',
>> it suggests that not only clock providers are consumers without
>> underlying device driver.
> Like I said in my earlier reply:
>
> | > - many clock providers, irq domains are not provided by devices,
>
> | That seems like something we can and possibly should change if we want.
>
> This applies just as much to consumers as to providers.

OK, then it is just something to do :)

Regards
Andrzej