On 21/05/13 06:10, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On 05/20/2013 06:28 AM, James Hogan wrote:
>> diff --git a/include/linux/clk-private.h b/include/linux/clk-private.h
>> index dd7adff..8138c94 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/clk-private.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/clk-private.h
>> @@ -33,8 +33,11 @@ struct clk {
>> const char **parent_names;
>> struct clk **parents;
>> u8 num_parents;
>> + u8 new_parent_index;
>
> Why do you need this? Given the new_parent, can't the specific clock
> implementation just look it up when set_rate() is called? Wouldn't that
> be the only time you would actually need the index?
>
> If it's just for optimization of some error cases, I think we should
> drop this to keep the code simpler. One less state to keep track of when
> reading, writing or reviewing the clock framework.
clk_change_rate cannot currently return an error condition so I had
assumed it was better to check that the requested parent clock has a
valid parent index prior to starting to change any clock rates or firing
off any notifications.
Cheers
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
