From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Viresh Kumar Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/14] clk: Create of_clk_shared_by_cpus() Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 07:27:37 +0530 Message-ID: References: <5f7164d789e87c62d722b575980c92dfd0504334.1404231535.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org> <53B2F741.2000501@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: In-Reply-To: <53B2F741.2000501@codeaurora.org> Sender: linux-pm-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Stephen Boyd , Rob Herring Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Shawn Guo , Lists linaro-kernel , "linux-pm@vger.kernel.org" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Arvind Chauhan , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, Sachin Kamat , Thomas P Abraham , Nishanth Menon , Tomasz Figa , Mike Turquette List-Id: linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org On 1 July 2014 23:30, Stephen Boyd wrote: > On 07/01/14 09:32, Viresh Kumar wrote: >> Create a new routine of_clk_shared_by_cpus() that finds if clock lines are >> shared between two CPUs. This is verified by comparing "clocks" property from >> CPU's DT node. >> >> Returns 1 if clock line is shared between them, 0 if clock isn't shared and >> return appropriate errors in case nodes/properties are missing. >> >> Cc: Mike Turquette >> Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar >> --- >> drivers/clk/clk.c | 56 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> include/linux/clk.h | 6 ++++++ > > This doesn't make much sense to me. This function doesn't deal with > struct clk pointers or any of the internals of the common clock > framework so why put it in clk.c? It looks more like an internal > function that the cpufreq-generic driver should have. I thought this is what Rob suggested when he said: "I think a clock api function would be better." I had it in cpufreq-cpu0 driver earlier and moved it to a separate API yesterday only. Sorry if I misunderstood his comment.