[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <201102150941.00668.jeremy.kerr@canonical.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 09:41:00 +0800
From: Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Ryan Mallon <ryan@...ewatersys.com>,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
Dima Zavin <dmitriyz@...gle.com>,
Lorenzo Pieralisi <Lorenzo.Pieralisi@....com>,
Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org,
Ben Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>,
Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
Ben Dooks <ben-linux@...ff.org>,
"Uwe Kleine-König"
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH 2/3] clk: Generic support for fixed-rate clocks
Hi Ryan,
> A fixed clock may still have other operations such as enable/disable.
Then it's not a fixed clock; I'd prefer this to be a separate type, as it's
now hardware dependent.
> Maybe do something like this instead:
> #define INIT_CLK_FIXED(name, ops, r) { \
> .clk = INIT_CLK(name.clk, ops, rate), \
> .clk.ops.get_rate = clk_fixed_get_rate, \
> .rate = (r), \
> }
>
> That's untested though. I'm not sure if you can reliably assign
> something twice in a struct initialiser?
also, clk->ops is a const.
Cheers,
Jeremy
--
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