All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 11:41:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110711114127.GI5092@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110711111153.GH3239@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:11:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 07:53:45PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> > We do need some way to have some idea which clocks we're talking about,
> > and for off-SoC stuff passing around struct clk pointers is rather
> > painful.  At some point some bit of code is going to have to get hold of
> > the actual struct clk and then map it onto the devices using it.

> As I haven't seen any of this "passing around struct clk pointers" crap
> recently, I can only guess at what you're saying.  I thought all that
> had been solved with _proper_ use of clkdev.

The problem is getting the data into clkdev in the first place for the
off-SoC devices.

> clkdev can provide you with a struct clk for _any_ device in the system
> where its name is known at build time.

Right, on the consumer side it's all sorted and works really well.  The
trick is on the provider side where you need to have the clock available
to be able to add the mappings for it.

Perhaps I'm just missing something about how this should all work -
actually, the regulator solution probably works fine here.  Pass an
array of mappings into either the driver or the clock subsystem and have
them add the mappings when the provider registers.  Whichever way around
should just be some hooks in the new subsystem.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Mark Brown <broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@canonical.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant@secretlab.ca>,
	linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, patches@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock provider
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:41:30 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110711114127.GI5092@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110711111153.GH3239@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:11:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 07:53:45PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> > We do need some way to have some idea which clocks we're talking about,
> > and for off-SoC stuff passing around struct clk pointers is rather
> > painful.  At some point some bit of code is going to have to get hold of
> > the actual struct clk and then map it onto the devices using it.

> As I haven't seen any of this "passing around struct clk pointers" crap
> recently, I can only guess at what you're saying.  I thought all that
> had been solved with _proper_ use of clkdev.

The problem is getting the data into clkdev in the first place for the
off-SoC devices.

> clkdev can provide you with a struct clk for _any_ device in the system
> where its name is known at build time.

Right, on the consumer side it's all sorted and works really well.  The
trick is on the provider side where you need to have the clock available
to be able to add the mappings for it.

Perhaps I'm just missing something about how this should all work -
actually, the regulator solution probably works fine here.  Pass an
array of mappings into either the driver or the clock subsystem and have
them add the mappings when the provider registers.  Whichever way around
should just be some hooks in the new subsystem.

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com (Mark Brown)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock provider
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 20:41:30 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110711114127.GI5092@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110711111153.GH3239@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:11:53PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 07:53:45PM +0900, Mark Brown wrote:
> > We do need some way to have some idea which clocks we're talking about,
> > and for off-SoC stuff passing around struct clk pointers is rather
> > painful.  At some point some bit of code is going to have to get hold of
> > the actual struct clk and then map it onto the devices using it.

> As I haven't seen any of this "passing around struct clk pointers" crap
> recently, I can only guess at what you're saying.  I thought all that
> had been solved with _proper_ use of clkdev.

The problem is getting the data into clkdev in the first place for the
off-SoC devices.

> clkdev can provide you with a struct clk for _any_ device in the system
> where its name is known at build time.

Right, on the consumer side it's all sorted and works really well.  The
trick is on the provider side where you need to have the clock available
to be able to add the mappings for it.

Perhaps I'm just missing something about how this should all work -
actually, the regulator solution probably works fine here.  Pass an
array of mappings into either the driver or the clock subsystem and have
them add the mappings when the provider registers.  Whichever way around
should just be some hooks in the new subsystem.

  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-11 11:41 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-07-11  2:53 [PATCH 0/6] clk: Initial feedback for off-SoC slow bus clocks Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53 ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53 ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53 ` [PATCH 1/6] clk: Prototype and document clk_register() Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53   ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53   ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53   ` [PATCH 2/6] clk: Provide a dummy clk_unregister() Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53   ` [PATCH 3/6] clk: Constify struct clk_hw_ops Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53   ` [PATCH 4/6] clk: Add Kconfig option to build all generic clk drivers Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53   ` [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock provider Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  9:34     ` [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11  9:34       ` [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock provider Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11  9:34       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 10:53       ` [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock Mark Brown
2011-07-11 10:53         ` [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock provider Mark Brown
2011-07-11 10:53         ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11 11:11         ` [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 11:11           ` [PATCH 5/6] clk: Support multiple instances of the same clock provider Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 11:11           ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 11:41           ` Mark Brown [this message]
2011-07-11 11:41             ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11 11:41             ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53   ` [PATCH 6/6] clk: Add initial WM831x clock driver Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  2:53     ` Mark Brown
2011-07-15  2:53     ` Grant Likely
2011-07-15  2:53       ` Grant Likely
2011-07-15  2:53       ` Grant Likely
2011-07-15  5:05       ` Mark Brown
2011-07-15  5:05         ` Mark Brown
2011-07-15  5:05         ` Mark Brown
2011-07-15  5:14         ` Ryan Mallon
2011-07-15  5:14           ` Ryan Mallon
2011-07-15  5:14           ` Ryan Mallon
2011-07-15  2:53   ` [PATCH 1/6] clk: Prototype and document clk_register() Grant Likely
2011-07-15  2:53     ` Grant Likely
2011-07-15  2:53     ` Grant Likely
2011-07-11  3:57 ` [PATCH 0/6] clk: Initial feedback for off-SoC slow bus clocks Mark Brown
2011-07-11  3:57   ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  3:57   ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11  4:30   ` Mike Frysinger
2011-07-11  4:30     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-07-11  4:30     ` Mike Frysinger
2011-07-11  4:56     ` Barry Song
2011-07-11  4:56       ` Barry Song
2011-07-11  4:56       ` Barry Song
2011-07-11  5:01       ` [uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH 0/6] clk: Initial feedback for Mike Frysinger
2011-07-11  5:01         ` [uclinux-dist-devel] [PATCH 0/6] clk: Initial feedback for off-SoC slow bus clocks Mike Frysinger
2011-07-11  5:01         ` Mike Frysinger
2011-07-11  9:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11  9:31   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11  9:31   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 10:07   ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-11 10:07     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-11 10:07     ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-11 10:28     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 10:28       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 10:28       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-07-11 10:46       ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-11 10:46         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-11 10:46         ` Sascha Hauer
2011-07-11 11:43         ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11 11:43           ` Mark Brown
2011-07-11 11:43           ` 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=20110711114127.GI5092@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --to=broonie@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.