[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080326170441.795fb928@hskinnemo-gx620.norway.atmel.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 17:04:41 +0100
From: Haavard Skinnemoen <haavard.skinnemoen@...el.com>
To: Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
hskinnemoen@...el.com, domen.puncer@...argo.com,
lethal@...ux-sh.org, tony@...mide.com, rmk+kernel@....linux.org.uk,
paul@...an.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Clocklib: add generic framework for managing
clocks.
On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 18:52:03 +0300
Dmitry Baryshkov <dbaryshkov@...il.com> wrote:
> +struct clk {
> + struct list_head node;
> + struct clk *parent;
> +
> + const char *name;
> + struct module *owner;
> +
> + int users;
> + unsigned long rate;
> + int delay;
> +
> + int (*can_get) (struct clk *, struct device *);
> + int (*set_parent) (struct clk *, struct clk *);
> + int (*enable) (struct clk *);
> + void (*disable) (struct clk *);
> + unsigned long (*getrate) (struct clk*);
> + int (*setrate) (struct clk *, unsigned long);
> + long (*roundrate) (struct clk *, unsigned long);
> +
> + void *priv;
> +};
Hmm...this is exactly twice as big as the struct I'm currently using,
it doesn't contain all the fields I need, and it's undocumented.
I have quite a few clocks, so the increased memory consumption is quite
significant. What are the advantages of this?
Haavard
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists