From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752138AbbH0SxP (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Aug 2015 14:53:15 -0400 Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:36202 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751231AbbH0SxO (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Aug 2015 14:53:14 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2015 11:53:10 -0700 From: Stephen Boyd To: Boris Brezillon Cc: Nicolas Ferre , Alexandre Belloni , Ludovic Desroches , Josh Wu , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Turquette Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: at91: add audio pll clock driver Message-ID: <20150827185310.GV19120@codeaurora.org> References: <1438337864-27949-1-git-send-email-nicolas.ferre@atmel.com> <20150827113035.072cccb5@bbrezillon> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150827113035.072cccb5@bbrezillon> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/27, Boris Brezillon wrote: > Nicolas Ferre wrote: > > + > > +static long clk_audio_pll_pad_round_rate(struct clk_hw *hw, unsigned long rate, > > + unsigned long *parent_rate) > > I thought we were trying to get rid of the ->round_rate() function in > favor of the ->determine_rate() one (which is more flexible), but maybe > I'm wrong. Stephen, Mike, what's your opinion? I'm not opposed to people using ->round_rate() if they want to use it and it serves their purpose. Moving everyone to ->determine_rate() will be a long journey that has little to no benefit for most drivers, so it's not like we need to force everyone to use the determine rate op for new submissions so that we can delete the round rate op one day. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project