Quoting Amit Kucheria (2013-01-25 03:18:05) > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Sanjay Singh Rawat > <sanjay.ra...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Thursday 24 January 2013 11:24 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: > >> > >> Quoting Sanjay Singh Rawat (2013-01-24 08:01:33) > > > You're missing a changelog describing why this patch is required. :) > > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Sanjay Singh Rawat <sanjay.ra...@linaro.com> > >> > >> > >> Sanjay, > >> > >> Have you seen the patch to dump the CCF tree from a single sysfs file, > >> in JSON format? > >> > >> > >> http://git.linaro.org/gitweb?p=people/mturquette/linux.git;a=commitdiff;h=bddca8944a7ab6699984c4b1b677261eb1c8d819;hp=1af599df6bdad9ee34ae9e50efcda273e12b9d4f > >> > >> This is much nicer than parsing a directory structure. It is faster and > >> most importantly the data is atomic. A lock is held across the clock > >> framework while the data is accessed so you don't have to worry about > >> data changing in between reads like you do with the directory method. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Mike > > > > Thanks Mike, yes i remember your point. This change is for addressing the > > bug of clock entries not getting populated on CCF enabled kernel. > > > > Will check for clock_tree_dump file implementation separately. > > I think what Mike is saying is that you could get rid of all the > directory parsing code and just read this one file for all of your > clock data. >
I think leaving the legacy code in is fine. The current powerdebug code already checks to see if this is a CCF or legacy clk tree, so we could leave the legacy code in and change the CCF method to use the clk-dump sysfs file when CCF is detected. > > But it wouldn't work for platforms that haven't converted over to CCF. > Mike, all member platforms converted over now? > I'll have to check, but as stated above we don't need to remove the legacy clk code. Regards, Mike _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
