[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAQ0ZWRyowjHvR0_T-cA8UmbMNpo6yd6OLJ_HPh4foVULF0Tyg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2012 13:46:28 +0800
From: Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
To: "Turquette, Mike" <mturquette@...com>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
patches@...aro.org, Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>,
Arnd Bergman <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] clk: introduce the common clock framework
On 21 March 2012 07:46, Turquette, Mike <mturquette@...com> wrote:
...
> As mentioned above, you'll still need to check for CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT
> in your .round_rate implementation with __clk_get_flags(hw->clk).
>
For my particular case, the clk is PLL with fixed rate clk
(oscillator) as parent. It's known that flag CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT will
never be set for this type of clks.
> Did you want to send a formal patch or just have me absorb this into
> the fixes I'm brewing already? I've already fixed the potential null
> ptr dereferences in clk_calc_new_rates, but that's no big deal.
>
The code was attached for better discussion, and I would leave the
formal patch to you.
Regards,
Shawn
--
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