Re: [PATCH v3 12/25] clk: bcm: rpi: Use CCF boundaries instead of rolling our own

2020-06-05 Thread Nicolas Saenz Julienne
On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 11:28 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > Hi Nicolas, > > On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 08:02:22PM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > > On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 17:45 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > > The raspberrypi firmware clock driver has a min_rate / max_rate clamping > > > by > >

Re: [PATCH v3 12/25] clk: bcm: rpi: Use CCF boundaries instead of rolling our own

2020-06-05 Thread Maxime Ripard
Hi Nicolas, On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 08:02:22PM +0200, Nicolas Saenz Julienne wrote: > On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 17:45 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > > The raspberrypi firmware clock driver has a min_rate / max_rate clamping by > > storing the info it needs in a private structure. > > > > However, the

Re: [PATCH v3 12/25] clk: bcm: rpi: Use CCF boundaries instead of rolling our own

2020-06-04 Thread Nicolas Saenz Julienne
On Wed, 2020-05-27 at 17:45 +0200, Maxime Ripard wrote: > The raspberrypi firmware clock driver has a min_rate / max_rate clamping by > storing the info it needs in a private structure. > > However, the CCF already provides such a facility, so we can switch to it > to remove the boilerplate. > >

[PATCH v3 12/25] clk: bcm: rpi: Use CCF boundaries instead of rolling our own

2020-05-27 Thread Maxime Ripard
The raspberrypi firmware clock driver has a min_rate / max_rate clamping by storing the info it needs in a private structure. However, the CCF already provides such a facility, so we can switch to it to remove the boilerplate. Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard --- drivers/clk/bcm/clk-raspberrypi.c |