Hello Hiroshi,
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
I understood both points you explained below, while I still think that
standardizing clock names may be a little bit rigid.
Perhaps you can help me understand - are you referring to the use of the
TRM clocks, rather than creating a
Hi Paul,
From: ext Paul Walmsley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RFC] clk: introduce clk_associate
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2008 03:13:49 -0600 (MDT)
Hello Hiroshi,
On Tue, 14 Oct 2008, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
I understood both points you explained below, while I still think
Hi,
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-omap-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Walmsley
between omap_clk_associate() and vclk, my preference is for the
omap_clk_associate() approach.
The core problem is that the vclk patches create clocks with multiple
parents in a way that is hidden
Hi,
between omap_clk_associate() and vclk, my preference is for the
omap_clk_associate() approach.
The core problem is that the vclk patches create clocks with multiple
parents in a way that is hidden from the clock framework. This causes
both semantic and practical problems.
Semantically,
Hi Paul,
I understood both points you explained below, while I still think that
standardizing clock names may be a little bit rigid.
Thank you for your review and comments.
Hiroshi DOYU
From: ext Paul Walmsley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RFC] clk: introduce clk_associate
Date
On Thursday 02 October 2008, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
For some of the above drivers, omap's functional clock and
interface clock doesn't make sense.
Actually, I thought OMAP was pretty consistent about having
both on all modules where it made sense.
For such device drivers, those
clocks may
On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 11:42:08AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
They're all OMAP-specific drivers. They can know that they
need to ask for both clocks. If perchance only one of them
were actually needed, that would be exceptional ... and the
driver should be able to assume the device was
Hi David,
From: ext David Brownell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RFC] clk: introduce clk_associate
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 13:50:02 -0700
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
Or, this feature itself can be covered by 'virtual clock(vclk)'?
http://marc.info/?l
* Hiroshi DOYU [EMAIL PROTECTED] [081003 09:24]:
Hi David,
From: ext David Brownell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RFC] clk: introduce clk_associate
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 13:50:02 -0700
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
Or, this feature itself can
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
Or, this feature itself can be covered by 'virtual clock(vclk)'?
http://marc.info/?l=linux-omapm=122066992729949w=2
which means that,
in this case, if 'vclk' just has a single child, not multiple, it can
be used just as 'aliasing' of
On Thu, Oct 02, 2008 at 01:50:02PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Hiroshi DOYU wrote:
Or, this feature itself can be covered by 'virtual clock(vclk)'?
http://marc.info/?l=linux-omapm=122066992729949w=2
which means that,
in this case, if 'vclk' just
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Felipe Balbi wrote:
+/**
+ * clk_associate - associates a user to a clock so device drivers don't
+ * have to care about clock names
+ *
+ * @id: clock id as defined in arch/arm/mach-omapX/clk.h
+ * @dev: device pointer for the clock user
+ * @f: a function
On Wed, Oct 01, 2008 at 08:51:46AM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Felipe Balbi wrote:
+/**
+ * clk_associate - associates a user to a clock so device drivers don't
+ * have to care about clock names
+ *
+ * @id: clock id as defined in
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Felipe Balbi wrote:
So mirroring at91_clock_associate() ... maybe this
should be omap_clock_associate() not clk_associate().
Well, I'm ok with that but I'd rather see clk_associate() moving to
clk api so anyone who needs that, could use it.
Seems like that's
From: ext David Brownell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] [RFC] clk: introduce clk_associate
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2008 09:15:45 -0700
On Wednesday 01 October 2008, Felipe Balbi wrote:
So mirroring at91_clock_associate() ... maybe this
should be omap_clock_associate
15 matches
Mail list logo
