On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 3:16 PM, Yong Shen <yong.s...@linaro.org> wrote:
>>> In the last several weeks, Jeremy and I reviewed the clock debug code
>>> based on common clock struct. In this code, I used below code to
>>> expose clock information:
>>>
>>>
>>> +static int clk_debug_rate_get(void *data, u64 *val)
>>> +{
>>> + struct clk *clk = data;
>>> +
>>> + *val = (u64)clk_get_rate(clk);
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE(clk_debug_rate_fops, clk_debug_rate_get, NULL,
>>> + "%llu\n");
>>> +
>>> .....
>>> + d = debugfs_create_file("rate", S_IRUGO, clk->dentry, (void *)clk,
>>> + &clk_debug_rate_fops);
>>>
>>> Therefore, whenever the clock information is accessed, it can reflect
>>> the truth, since it calls clk interface like clk_get_rate() to get the
>>> right value.
>>
>> Why is it called clk_debug_rate_get()? Is there not a standard
>> clk_rate_get() that we can use?
> There is. clk_get_rate() is called inside this function. By using
> these lines of code, the purpose is to advocate using functions
> provided by clock system like clk_rate_get() directly, instead of
> using variable to store clock information.
I guess I am confused why we don't directly use clk_get_rate() instead
of clk_debug_get_rate() in the 'show' call for the sysfs entry.
/Amit
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
