[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120531130456.GB15786@sirena.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 14:04:56 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: "Cousson, Benoit" <b-cousson@...com>
Cc: Peter De Schrijver <pdeschrijver@...dia.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>,
"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 Thu, May 31, 2012 at 02:50:00PM +0200, Cousson, Benoit wrote:
> Now the question is should we extend the Linux device structure to
> handle such HW IP, or should we extend the clock definition to
> handle this kind of extended clock node.
> It looks to me that this kind of function does belong to the device
> more than to the clock node.
This is looking a lot like what power domains do to me...
--
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