From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from wa-out-1112.google.com (wa-out-1112.google.com [209.85.146.183]) by ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F902DDE2E for ; Mon, 15 Oct 2007 08:42:46 +1000 (EST) Received: by wa-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id m28so1876615wag for ; Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:42:45 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 16:42:45 -0600 From: "Grant Likely" Sender: glikely@secretlab.ca To: "Domen Puncer" Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] clk for mpc52xx: use psc_mclk's in spi driver In-Reply-To: <20071014081027.GJ3000@nd47.coderock.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <20071014080813.GH3000@nd47.coderock.org> <20071014081027.GJ3000@nd47.coderock.org> Cc: david-b@pacbell.net, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On 10/14/07, Domen Puncer wrote: > Use clocks subsystem in spi driver. I don't understand the advantage of this approach. Is the current code broken? I agree that abstraction is good; but in this case it seems these two patches add a lot of code for a very simple calculation. Also, there is exactly 2 chips that use these devices, the mpc5200 and the mpc5200b, and they are both wired up in exactly the same way. I'm inclined to believe that splitting of reading of the CDM into a separate driver (or at least using the clk infrastructure) is over the edge of diminishing returns. However, I could be convinced that having a utility function for setting the PSC clock rate is a useful thing, but until arch/ppc goes away, you should support it in both arch/ppc and arch/powerpc. Cheers, g. -- Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng. Secret Lab Technologies Ltd. grant.likely@secretlab.ca (403) 399-0195