[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55C9DF7B.4040308@st.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 13:41:47 +0200
From: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@...com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 3/3] clk: introduce CLK_ENABLE_HAND_OFF flag
Sorry Geert, my reply has been cut:
On 08/11/2015 01:36 PM, Maxime Coquelin wrote:
> Hi Geert,
>
> On 08/11/2015 12:11 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> Hi Maxime,
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Maxime Coquelin
>> <maxime.coquelin@...com> wrote:
>>> How can we pass CLK_ENABLE_HAND_OFF flag to a specific clock on STi
>>> platform?
>> Add the flag to the relevant clocks in the C code, e.g. in
>> clk_register_flexgen():
>>
>> if (!strcmp(name, "clk-icn-cpu"))
>> init.flags |= CLK_ENABLE_HAND_OFF;
The main problem I see with this proposal is that clk_register_flexgen()
is called for several SoCs (STiH407/410/418...).
Each of these SoCs have this clock, but maybe STiH407 will need the
flag, but not STiH410 and STiH418.
So I think the best place to set this information is in DT, where the
differentiation is made between the SoCs.
Kind regards,
Maxime
--
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