All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add a generic struct clk
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 10:00:12 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110710100012.GA4812@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110710095013.GZ4812@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:50:13AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 06:09:30PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 03:27:49PM +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> > > [This series was originally titled 'Add a common struct clk', but
> > > the goals have changed since that first set of patches. We're now aiming
> > > for a more complete generic clock infrastructure, rather than just
> > > abstracting struct clk]
> 
> ... which will mean the platforms at the simpler end of the spectrum
> will ignore it because it'll be far too heavy weight for them.
> 
> If we're going to do something generic with it, then we need something
> that _can_ scale from damned simple right up to OMAP-type complex.  We
> don't want to start with something OMAP-type complex and have everyone
> use it even for just one or two (or even 30 simple enable/disable
> non-tree like) clocks.  And those platforms should not have to have
> several K of unused code in their kernel because of it.
> 
> Otherwise, we'll just end up going back to people trying to directly
> access clock mask registers from drivers.

And... btw... I'm getting the impression that clk API stuff is being done
behind my back, with decisions on the direction being taken in closed room
scenarios - maybe because I objected fairly strongly to the previous set
of patches.

I hope I'm wrong, but that's the impression I now have, based upon where
the discussion got to last time around and the quoted part of Jeremy's
mail (which is all I have to go on.)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Cc: Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@canonical.com>,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add a generic struct clk
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 11:00:12 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110710100012.GA4812@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110710095013.GZ4812@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:50:13AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 06:09:30PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 03:27:49PM +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> > > [This series was originally titled 'Add a common struct clk', but
> > > the goals have changed since that first set of patches. We're now aiming
> > > for a more complete generic clock infrastructure, rather than just
> > > abstracting struct clk]
> 
> ... which will mean the platforms at the simpler end of the spectrum
> will ignore it because it'll be far too heavy weight for them.
> 
> If we're going to do something generic with it, then we need something
> that _can_ scale from damned simple right up to OMAP-type complex.  We
> don't want to start with something OMAP-type complex and have everyone
> use it even for just one or two (or even 30 simple enable/disable
> non-tree like) clocks.  And those platforms should not have to have
> several K of unused code in their kernel because of it.
> 
> Otherwise, we'll just end up going back to people trying to directly
> access clock mask registers from drivers.

And... btw... I'm getting the impression that clk API stuff is being done
behind my back, with decisions on the direction being taken in closed room
scenarios - maybe because I objected fairly strongly to the previous set
of patches.

I hope I'm wrong, but that's the impression I now have, based upon where
the discussion got to last time around and the quoted part of Jeremy's
mail (which is all I have to go on.)

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: linux@arm.linux.org.uk (Russell King - ARM Linux)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] Add a generic struct clk
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2011 11:00:12 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110710100012.GA4812@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110710095013.GZ4812@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 10:50:13AM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 06:09:30PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 03:27:49PM +0800, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> > > [This series was originally titled 'Add a common struct clk', but
> > > the goals have changed since that first set of patches. We're now aiming
> > > for a more complete generic clock infrastructure, rather than just
> > > abstracting struct clk]
> 
> ... which will mean the platforms at the simpler end of the spectrum
> will ignore it because it'll be far too heavy weight for them.
> 
> If we're going to do something generic with it, then we need something
> that _can_ scale from damned simple right up to OMAP-type complex.  We
> don't want to start with something OMAP-type complex and have everyone
> use it even for just one or two (or even 30 simple enable/disable
> non-tree like) clocks.  And those platforms should not have to have
> several K of unused code in their kernel because of it.
> 
> Otherwise, we'll just end up going back to people trying to directly
> access clock mask registers from drivers.

And... btw... I'm getting the impression that clk API stuff is being done
behind my back, with decisions on the direction being taken in closed room
scenarios - maybe because I objected fairly strongly to the previous set
of patches.

I hope I'm wrong, but that's the impression I now have, based upon where
the discussion got to last time around and the quoted part of Jeremy's
mail (which is all I have to go on.)

  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-10 10:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 139+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-20  7:27 Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27 ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27 ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27 ` [PATCH 4/4] clk: Add simple gated clock Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20 11:37   ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-05-20 11:37     ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-05-20 11:37     ` Arnd Bergmann
2011-05-20 22:19   ` Rob Herring
2011-05-20 22:19     ` Rob Herring
2011-05-20 22:19     ` Rob Herring
2011-05-20  7:27 ` [PATCH 2/4] clk: Implement clk_set_rate Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20 12:25   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-20 12:25     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-20 12:25     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  7:59   ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  7:59     ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  7:59     ` Colin Cross
2011-05-25 19:03   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-25 19:03     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-25 19:03     ` Sascha Hauer
     [not found]     ` <1306373867.2875.162.camel@pororo>
2011-05-26  6:54       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-26  6:54         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-26  6:54         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-30  5:05   ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:05     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:05     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-20  7:27 ` [PATCH 3/4] clk: Add fixed-rate clock Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-24  7:01   ` Francesco VIRLINZI
2011-05-30  5:01   ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:01     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:01     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:02   ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:02     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:02     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-20  7:27 ` [PATCH 1/4] clk: Add a generic clock infrastructure Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20  7:27   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-05-20 11:59   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-20 11:59     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-20 11:59     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-20 13:25     ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-20 13:25       ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-20 13:25       ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-20 13:36       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-20 13:36         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-20 13:36         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-23 23:55   ` Colin Cross
2011-05-23 23:55     ` Colin Cross
2011-05-23 23:55     ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  7:02     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  7:02       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  7:02       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  7:51       ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  7:51         ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  7:51         ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  8:38         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  8:38           ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  8:38           ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-25 11:22           ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25 11:22             ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25 11:22             ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25 11:43         ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-25 11:43           ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-25 11:43           ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-24  4:18   ` viresh kumar
2011-05-24  4:30     ` viresh kumar
2011-05-24  4:18     ` viresh kumar
2011-05-25 10:47   ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25 10:47     ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25 10:47     ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-30  5:00     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:00       ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:00       ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-23 23:12 ` [PATCH 0/4] Add a generic struct clk Colin Cross
2011-05-23 23:12   ` Colin Cross
2011-05-23 23:12   ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  6:26   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  6:26     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  6:26     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  7:31     ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  7:31       ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  7:31       ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24  8:09       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  8:09         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24  8:09         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-24 19:41         ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24 19:41           ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24 19:41           ` Colin Cross
2011-05-25  2:32           ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25  2:32             ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25  2:32             ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25  6:23           ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-25  6:23             ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-25  6:23             ` Sascha Hauer
2011-05-25  7:51           ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-25  7:51             ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-25  7:51             ` Thomas Gleixner
2011-05-27 14:39           ` Mark Brown
2011-05-27 14:39             ` Mark Brown
2011-05-27 14:39             ` Mark Brown
2011-05-24 17:22   ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-24 17:22     ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-24 17:22     ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-24 17:52     ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24 17:52       ` Colin Cross
2011-05-24 17:52       ` Colin Cross
2011-05-25  2:08       ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25  2:08         ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-25  2:08         ` Richard Zhao
2011-05-30  5:20 ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:20   ` Mike Frysinger
2011-05-30  5:20   ` Mike Frysinger
2011-07-10  9:09 ` Mark Brown
2011-07-10  9:09   ` Mark Brown
2011-07-10  9:09   ` Mark Brown
2011-07-10  9:50   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-10  9:50     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-10  9:50     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-10 10:00     ` Russell King - ARM Linux [this message]
2011-07-10 10:00       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-10 10:00       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-10 11:27     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-10 11:27       ` Mark Brown
2011-07-10 11:27       ` Mark Brown
2011-07-10 11:52       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-10 11:52         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-10 11:52         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11  2:49   ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-07-11  2:49     ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-07-11  2:49     ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-07-11  3:57     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  3:57       ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  3:57       ` Mark Brown

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110710100012.GA4812@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk \
    --to=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 0/4] Add a generic struct clk' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.