linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 4/5] clk: imx: add imx composite clock

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <5c0cc4de8403fca17431a9382f7e34e8003f497b.camel@nxp.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Oct 2018 22:56:14 +0000
From:   Leonard Crestez <leonard.crestez@....com>
To:     "l.stach@...gutronix.de" <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
        Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@....com>,
        "shawnguo@...nel.org" <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        "kernel@...gutronix.de" <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        "A.s. Dong" <aisheng.dong@....com>
CC:     dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "mturquette@...libre.com" <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        "abelvesa@...ux.com" <abelvesa@...ux.com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "sboyd@...nel.org" <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
        "mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
        "robh@...nel.org" <robh@...nel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-clk@...r.kernel.org" <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 4/5] clk: imx: add imx composite clock

On Tue, 2018-10-09 at 08:37 +0000, Abel Vesa wrote:
> +struct clk *imx_clk_composite_8m_flags(const char *name,
> +					const char **parent_names,
> +					int num_parents, void __iomem *reg,
> +					unsigned long flags);
> +
> +#define __imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, flags) \
> +	imx_clk_composite_8m_flags(name, parent_names, \
> +		ARRAY_SIZE(parent_names), reg, \
> +		flags | CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT | CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE)
> +
> +#define imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg) \
> +	__imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, 0)
> +
> +#define imx_clk_composite_8m_critical(name, parent_names, reg) \
> +	__imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, CLK_IS_CRITICAL)

Does anyone else think that the "8m" would be prettier next to imx
rather than as a suffix? Using imx8m_clk_composite* and
imx7ulp_clk_composite* makes more sense to me.

--
Regards,
Leonard