[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4D5A063F.1010102@codeaurora.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 20:51:11 -0800
From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>
To: Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>
CC: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
Nicolas Pitre <nicolas.pitre@...aro.org>,
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>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ryan Mallon <ryan@...ewatersys.com>,
Dima Zavin <dmitriyz@...gle.com>,
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
On 02/14/2011 05:41 PM, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> 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.
>
I'm confused. If a clock's rate can't be changed and it can't be enabled
or disabled, then what's the point of representing that clock
signal/line as a clock in the driver. Seems like a "nothing to see here,
move along" type of clock. To express it differently, I find this
similar to "if (1) { ... }". Obviously I'm missing something here. What
is it?
-Saravana
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
--
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