[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120531075125.GL8026@tbergstrom-lnx.Nvidia.com>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 10:51:25 +0300
From: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
CC: Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] clk: add extension API
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 10:52:31AM +0200, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 5/29/2012 2:58 AM, Peter De Schrijver wrote:
> > Add an extension API for clocks. This allows clocktypes to provide extensions
> > for features which are uncommon and cannot be easily mapped onto normal clock
> > framework concecpts. eg: resetting blocks, configuring clock phase etc.
>
> This seems rather generic. Why not add more specific APIs/concepts like
> clk_reset(), clk_set_phase(), etc.? If they don't map, maybe we should
> make them map.
>
Some of those might be very SoC specific. Eg OMAP doesn't need software
controlled modulereset. I don't think we should add a new function to the
clock framework for clock related features which only exist in a single
SoC or family. Ideally we could use inheritance to add methods to derived
clocktypes, but that's not really possible in C unfortunately.
Cheers,
Peter.
--
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