On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:01:49AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 09:48:44AM +0100, Francesco VIRLINZI wrote:
> > Hi Jeremy
> > In November I already sent a proposal on
> > a generic linux clk framework.
> > On that I would suggest:
> >
> >>
> >> +struct clk {
> >> + const struct clk_operations *ops;
> >>
> > spinlock_t lock;
> > const char *name;
> > int id;
>
> Name and ID are totally pointless, unless you insist on using the clk
> API in the wrong way (like S3C does.)
I do intend to change the clock lookup on the Samsung series, but we're
currently in the process of trying to do a whole pile of work on not
only adding new SoCs but also cleaning up the existing support and making
a whole pile of code common to all the Samsung SoC family.
I never got the time to go throughly through Francesco's clock framework
but it seemed rathe rcomplicated for our current requirements and also
had a whole pile of style problems that made it really difficult to read.
--
Ben
Q: What's a light-year?
A: One-third less calories than a regular year.
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
