[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <38627095-a92d-ea8b-56b6-7a4440fb6635@quicinc.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2023 14:21:37 +0800
From: Jie Luo <quic_luoj@...cinc.com>
To: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>
CC: <agross@...nel.org>, <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
<mturquette@...libre.com>, <sboyd@...nel.org>,
<robh+dt@...nel.org>, <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
<conor+dt@...nel.org>, <catalin.marinas@....com>,
<will@...nel.org>, <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
<linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>,
<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<quic_srichara@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] clk: qcom: common: add _qcom_cc_really_probe
On 8/19/2023 10:54 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 04:35:52PM +0800, Jie Luo wrote:
>> On 8/18/2023 11:14 AM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 15, 2023 at 04:52:04PM +0800, Luo Jie wrote:
> [..]
>>>> +int qcom_cc_really_probe(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>>> + const struct qcom_cc_desc *desc, struct regmap *regmap)
>>>
>>> Why do we want to keep this wrapper around?
>>>
>> There are many existed clock controller drivers using this wrapper
>> qcom_cc_really_probe, so i still keep this wrapper.
>>
>> do we need to remove this wrapper and update the existed drivers to use
>> _qcom_cc_really_probe?
>
> Yes please. The additional API does not add value, but can be confusing,
> so let's invest the extra time in fixing up all the drivers to keep the
> interface clean.
>
> Regards,
> Bjorn
Thanks Bjorn for the suggestion, will update this patch in the next version.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists