linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 02/14] clk: Create of_clk_shared_by

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 2 Jul 2014 07:27:37 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...aro.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>,
	Lists linaro-kernel <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Arvind Chauhan <arvind.chauhan@....com>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Sachin Kamat <spk.linux@...il.com>,
	Thomas P Abraham <thomas.ab@...sung.com>,
	Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Tomasz Figa <t.figa@...sung.com>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] clk: Create of_clk_shared_by_cpus()

On 1 July 2014 23:30, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> On 07/01/14 09:32, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> Create a new routine of_clk_shared_by_cpus() that finds if clock lines are
>> shared between two CPUs. This is verified by comparing "clocks" property from
>> CPU's DT node.
>>
>> Returns 1 if clock line is shared between them, 0 if clock isn't shared and
>> return appropriate errors in case nodes/properties are missing.
>>
>> Cc: Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/clk/clk.c   | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  include/linux/clk.h |  6 ++++++
>
> This doesn't make much sense to me. This function doesn't deal with
> struct clk pointers or any of the internals of the common clock
> framework so why put it in clk.c? It looks more like an internal
> function that the cpufreq-generic driver should have.

I thought this is what Rob suggested when he said:
"I think a clock api function would be better."

I had it in cpufreq-cpu0 driver earlier and moved it to a separate API
yesterday only.

Sorry if I misunderstood his comment.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/