From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sergei Shtylyov Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2013 15:13:18 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] arm: shmobile: r7s72100: add i2c clocks Message-Id: <52B1BB8E.9000008@cogentembedded.com> List-Id: References: <1387316678-10174-1-git-send-email-wsa@the-dreams.de> <1387316678-10174-3-git-send-email-wsa@the-dreams.de> <52B1892B.1020806@cogentembedded.com> <20131218114351.GD3314@katana> <52B18CC9.8090200@cogentembedded.com> <20131218121541.GE3314@katana> <20131218134914.GA32664@verge.net.au> <52B1AAE6.2020400@cogentembedded.com> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Hello. On 18-12-2013 18:44, Magnus Damm wrote: >>>>>>>> @@ -173,6 +179,10 @@ static struct clk_lookup lookups[] = { >>>>>>>> CLKDEV_CON_ID("mtu2_fck", &mstp_clks[MSTP33]), >>>>>>>> /* ICK */ >>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee000.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP97]), >>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee400.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP96]), >>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfee800.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP95]), >>>>>>>> + CLKDEV_DEV_ID("fcfeec00.i2c", &mstp_clks[MSTP94]), >>>>>>> These belong to some other place, the group marked by /* ICK */ >>>>>>> is only for CLKDEV_ICK_ID(). >>>>>> So, I'll create a /* DEV */ prefix? >>>>> I really don't know. Other places have /* MSTP */ comment in this >>>>> case despite all clocks, CLKDEV_DEV_ID() and CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are >>>>> really MSTP clocks. I considered the idea of separating >>>>> CLKDEV_ICK_ID() under /* ICK */ comment silly from the very start >>>>> but Simon didn't listen to me. >>>> I am puzzled, too. ICK is a type of registration and not a clock domain. >>>> Also, there is 'mtu2_fck' which is under ICK as well as MSTP? Looks >>>> wrong. From what I understand now, removing the /* ICK */ comment would >>>> be easiest and proper? >>> I'm not sure that I really understand what all the fuss is about. >>> As I understand things the convention that prevails for >>> MSTP clocks under mach-shmobile is as follows: >>> 1. Clocks not registered by CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together >>> under /* MSTP */ followed by: >>> 2. Clocks registered using CLKDEV_ICK_ID() are grouped together >>> under /* ICK */ >>> I am unsure of the historical reason for this >> Recent patches by Morimoto-san. >>> but it does seem to be consistent. >> No, it doesn't. These comments are *clearly* not consistent and should be >> removed at least. > Feel free to contribute patches! Of course, in my copious free time. I was against these ICKy comments (and the patches introducing them) in the first place but my opinion didn't count. I'm not sure it will count if I go and submit the patches (but the time will be lost). WBR, Sergei