[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52279D79.9070408@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 04 Sep 2013 22:52:09 +0200
From: Sebastian Hesselbarth <sebastian.hesselbarth@...il.com>
To: Sören Brinkmann <soren.brinkmann@...inx.com>
CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 01/16] ARM: call clk_of_init from time_init
On 09/04/2013 10:41 PM, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 09:32:24PM +0200, Sebastian Hesselbarth wrote:
> [ ... ]
>> For mach-zynq I prepared a patch set that brings it close to .init_time
>> removal. I have pushed it to
>> https://github.com/shesselba/linux-dove.git zynq-clk-init-v1
>> and will maybe post a patch set after this one is done.
>
> I think Steffen had a similar approach and we turned it down:
> Your proposal lets the clkc map the SLCR's registers. I think
> that approach is not right. It might be okay now, since the
> SLCR driver is pretty much a useless skeleton. But in general,
> there is a driver for the SLCR which maps that register
> region. No other driver should mess with it.
>
> Actually, one early version of my clkc looked pretty much like what you
> propose now and we changed it because of above reason.
Erm, passing the base address to clkc is less "mess with it" then
get it from DT?
Anyways, having a custom .init_time gives you full control over
of_clk_init and clocksource_of_init back again thanks to your
suggestion.
I'll stop converting zynq and let you decide on your own ;)
Sebastian
--
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