[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAFBinCA1gUUbEj=++1rGcFQ1RdyxSheofAo=TKw3-UaenFAcug@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 01:16:15 +0200
From: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
To: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
Cc: jbrunet@...libre.com, khilman@...libre.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
amergnat@...libre.com
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT v3 04/14] clk: meson: eeclk: add setup callback
+Cc Alexandre Mergnat
On Mon, Jul 1, 2019 at 11:13 AM Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com> wrote:
>
> Add a setup() callback in the eeclk structure, to call an optional
> call() function at end of eeclk probe to setup clocks.
>
> It's used for the G12A clock controller to setup the CPU clock notifiers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>
this will probably work fine, but I want do double check first
are we planning to get rid of meson-eeclk (mid-term)?
Alex has some patches to get rid of all these IN_PREFIX logic.
I'm asking because if we want to get rid of meson-eeclk it may be the
time to do so now to have less logic to migrate later on
Martin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists