On Fri, 23 Aug 2013, Linus Walleij wrote: > On Thu, Aug 22, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jo...@linaro.org> wrote: > > >> I really do not like the approach of uglifying something and then > >> beautifying it later... I prefer each step in isolation to be good > >> looking, or you will be confused when traversing the history. > > > > So then we have a few options, some more realistic than others. > > > > 1. Duplicate each of the; clk_reg_prcmu_*(), clk_reg_prcc_pclk(), > > clk_reg_prcc_kclk() calls into your proposed u8500_clk_init_dt(), > > which, while keeping everything separate would be unrealistic. > > I think this is perfectly realistic. > > You're not going to duplicate each clk_register_clkdev(), > which makes it way smaller than the original function, > and since one of the function will be inside a > > #ifdef CONFIG_OF > #endif > > After we switch the entire platform to DT-only it will be pretty > obvious which big chunk of code that needs to go away, it's > a clean cut. > > (Note: I know the #ifdef CONFIG_OF is not necessary anymore > since we switched to multiplatform, but I intend that marker for > humans, not machines.)
This sounds gross. To duplicate; u8500_clk_init(), u8540_clk_init() and u9540_clk_init() just for the sake of loading a few pointers into an array for a small part of the development cycle sounds obscene. I genuinely think keeping the current patch in this series and then removing the clk_register_clkdev() in the remove ATAG support series is the best way to go. If you think I'm wrong then I'll so as you ask however. Just pass me the sick bucket. -- Lee Jones Linaro ST-Ericsson Landing Team Lead Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
