From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Warren Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] ARM: tegra: Add clk_tegra structure and helper functions Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 19:31:05 -0600 Message-ID: <4FF24B59.1060508@wwwdotorg.org> References: <1340879846-12900-1-git-send-email-pgaikwad@nvidia.com> <1340879846-12900-5-git-send-email-pgaikwad@nvidia.com> <20120628182759.GA28424@gmail.com> <4FED688E.9090408@nvidia.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-tegra-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: "Turquette, Mike" Cc: Prashant Gaikwad , "linux-arm-kernel-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org" , "linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-tegra-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org" , "linux-lFZ/pmaqli7XmaaqVzeoHQ@public.gmane.org" , "ccross-z5hGa2qSFaRBDgjK7y7TUQ@public.gmane.org" , "olof-nZhT3qVonbNeoWH0uzbU5w@public.gmane.org" , Peter De Schrijver List-Id: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org On 07/02/2012 06:09 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote: > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote: >> On Thursday 28 June 2012 11:58 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: >>> We had some discussions in the past on your clock reset and external >>> line request operations which you've had to put into struct clk_tegra. >>> >>> Do you need to expose those ops to code in drivers/*? I consider that a >>> reasonable litmus test to start considering if something should be moved >>> into the generic clk.h api. >> >> >> Yes, we need these ops in drivers. Peter has sent a patch proposing to move >> these ops to generic clk. >> >> In addition, we also need mechanism/ops to change rate and parent from >> clk_ops implementation. There was some discussion but I do not know the >> latest status. >> > > Hi Prashant, > > OK, that is good to know. I haven't forgotten about this topic. I'm > still trying to think of the best way to expose less-common operations > to drivers... > > Based on Stephen's feedback in patch 0 I'll be waiting for another > version of this series before taking into clk-next. Oh, does this series depend on stuff in clk-next? I was intending to take it through the Tegra tree, since it definitely depends on (in complex ways through context if nothing else due to to large split/rename patches) a bunch of commits in Tegra's for-3.6/common-clk branch. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933306Ab2GCBbM (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jul 2012 21:31:12 -0400 Received: from avon.wwwdotorg.org ([70.85.31.133]:51482 "EHLO avon.wwwdotorg.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932718Ab2GCBbJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Jul 2012 21:31:09 -0400 Message-ID: <4FF24B59.1060508@wwwdotorg.org> Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 19:31:05 -0600 From: Stephen Warren User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120615 Thunderbird/13.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Turquette, Mike" CC: Prashant Gaikwad , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org" , "linux@arm.linux.org.uk" , "ccross@android.com" , "olof@lixom.net" , Peter De Schrijver Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] ARM: tegra: Add clk_tegra structure and helper functions References: <1340879846-12900-1-git-send-email-pgaikwad@nvidia.com> <1340879846-12900-5-git-send-email-pgaikwad@nvidia.com> <20120628182759.GA28424@gmail.com> <4FED688E.9090408@nvidia.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/02/2012 06:09 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote: > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote: >> On Thursday 28 June 2012 11:58 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: >>> We had some discussions in the past on your clock reset and external >>> line request operations which you've had to put into struct clk_tegra. >>> >>> Do you need to expose those ops to code in drivers/*? I consider that a >>> reasonable litmus test to start considering if something should be moved >>> into the generic clk.h api. >> >> >> Yes, we need these ops in drivers. Peter has sent a patch proposing to move >> these ops to generic clk. >> >> In addition, we also need mechanism/ops to change rate and parent from >> clk_ops implementation. There was some discussion but I do not know the >> latest status. >> > > Hi Prashant, > > OK, that is good to know. I haven't forgotten about this topic. I'm > still trying to think of the best way to expose less-common operations > to drivers... > > Based on Stephen's feedback in patch 0 I'll be waiting for another > version of this series before taking into clk-next. Oh, does this series depend on stuff in clk-next? I was intending to take it through the Tegra tree, since it definitely depends on (in complex ways through context if nothing else due to to large split/rename patches) a bunch of commits in Tegra's for-3.6/common-clk branch. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: swarren@wwwdotorg.org (Stephen Warren) Date: Mon, 02 Jul 2012 19:31:05 -0600 Subject: [PATCH 4/6] ARM: tegra: Add clk_tegra structure and helper functions In-Reply-To: References: <1340879846-12900-1-git-send-email-pgaikwad@nvidia.com> <1340879846-12900-5-git-send-email-pgaikwad@nvidia.com> <20120628182759.GA28424@gmail.com> <4FED688E.9090408@nvidia.com> Message-ID: <4FF24B59.1060508@wwwdotorg.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/02/2012 06:09 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote: > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote: >> On Thursday 28 June 2012 11:58 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: >>> We had some discussions in the past on your clock reset and external >>> line request operations which you've had to put into struct clk_tegra. >>> >>> Do you need to expose those ops to code in drivers/*? I consider that a >>> reasonable litmus test to start considering if something should be moved >>> into the generic clk.h api. >> >> >> Yes, we need these ops in drivers. Peter has sent a patch proposing to move >> these ops to generic clk. >> >> In addition, we also need mechanism/ops to change rate and parent from >> clk_ops implementation. There was some discussion but I do not know the >> latest status. >> > > Hi Prashant, > > OK, that is good to know. I haven't forgotten about this topic. I'm > still trying to think of the best way to expose less-common operations > to drivers... > > Based on Stephen's feedback in patch 0 I'll be waiting for another > version of this series before taking into clk-next. Oh, does this series depend on stuff in clk-next? I was intending to take it through the Tegra tree, since it definitely depends on (in complex ways through context if nothing else due to to large split/rename patches) a bunch of commits in Tegra's for-3.6/common-clk branch.