From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: richard.zhao@freescale.com (Richard Zhao)
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:45:29 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 01/40] clkdev: add clkname to struct clk_lookup
In-Reply-To: <20120411082401.GA32187@sirena.org.uk>
References: <1334065553-7565-1-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
 <1334065553-7565-2-git-send-email-s.hauer@pengutronix.de>
 <20120410143055.GT24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
 <20120410161142.GG3852@pengutronix.de>
 <20120411011149.GA20818@b20223-02.ap.freescale.net>
 <20120411082401.GA32187@sirena.org.uk>
Message-ID: <20120411084528.GB20818@b20223-02.ap.freescale.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 09:24:02AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 09:11:50AM +0800, Richard Zhao wrote:
> 
> > I don't like string loopup either. And after DT binding, we can use
> > phandler to refer clk.
> 
> No, this is only useful on platforms that use DT.  This is a generic
> Linux API so it needs to support architectures and platforms that don't
> use DT as it's vanishingly unlikely that DT will ever be adopted by all
> platforms.
My point is using string lookup as less as possible. When one register
a clk, one already got the struct clk* pointer and could use it in
struct lookup.

I'm worried about the performance as I saw string lookup is used more
and more often. In fast boot case, for example, even 5ms is important.

Thanks
Richard