linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] clk: new basic clk type for fractional divider

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 17 May 2014 02:15:43 +0200
From:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>
Cc:	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
	Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
	Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>,
	Li Aubrey <aubrey.li@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 3/4] clk: new basic clk type for fractional divider

On Friday, May 16, 2014 04:09:05 PM Mike Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Rafael J. Wysocki (2014-05-16 15:38:05)
> > On Thursday, May 15, 2014 09:53:49 AM Mike Turquette wrote:
> > > Quoting Heikki Krogerus (2014-05-15 06:40:25)
> > > > Fractional divider clocks are fairly common. This adds basic
> > > > type for them.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>
> > > 
> > > Taken into clk-next.
> > > 
> > > Just FYI, there was some talk at Embedded Linux Conference on providing
> > > a better abstraction layer for some of these "basic" clock types. This
> > > abstraction would allow the basic clock types to implement the
> > > machine-agnostic logic (e.g. an incoming rate is divided by a value) and
> > > then platforms and drivers could plug in the machine-specific parts
> > > (e.g. divider is made up of m/n, or divider is power-of-two, or divider
> > > is a simple integer with min == 1 and max == 5).
> > > 
> > > All of that is to say that in time this fractional divider could go away
> > > once the abstraction layer allows us to fold the m/n divider stuff into
> > > a core divider implementation.
> > > 
> > > Nothing wrong with the patch for now, so I've taken it for 3.16.
> > 
> > Well, OK, but I guess [4/4] depends on it and [4/4] also depends on
> > [1-2/4], so how you're proposing to resolve this?
> 
> I haven't yet published this patch to my tree, so no harm done. How
> about the following Formal Proposals?
> 
> 1) I ack the patch and don't merge it through my tree. You take it.
> 2) I provide a topic branch that we both merge.
> 
> Your choice.

Thanks!  I'd prefer 1) to be honest. :-)

Rafael

--
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/