On Wednesday 13 March 2013 10:00 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Prashant,
On Thursday 28 of February 2013 11:20:31 Stephen Warren wrote:
On 02/28/2013 12:58 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 03:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Wednesday 06 of February 2013 08:34:32 Prashant Gai
Hi Prashant,
On Thursday 28 of February 2013 11:20:31 Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 02/28/2013 12:58 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
> > On Wednesday 06 February 2013 03:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 06 of February 2013 08:34:32 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday 05 February 2013 03:4
On 02/28/2013 12:58 AM, Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 February 2013 03:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
>> On Wednesday 06 of February 2013 08:34:32 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 05 February 2013 03:45 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Prashant,
Thank you for your patch. Please
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 03:36 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
On Wednesday 06 of February 2013 08:34:32 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
On Tuesday 05 February 2013 03:45 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Prashant,
Thank you for your patch. Please see some comments inline.
On Monday 04 of February 2013 13:41:22
On Wednesday 06 of February 2013 08:34:32 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 February 2013 03:45 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
> > Hi Prashant,
> >
> > Thank you for your patch. Please see some comments inline.
> >
> > On Monday 04 of February 2013 13:41:22 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
> >> Not all cloc
On Wednesday 06 of February 2013 15:22:54 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
> On Wednesday 06 February 2013 11:40 AM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
> > Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Wed, 6 Feb 2013
03:55:00 +0100:
> No, clk_ops depends on the clocks you are using. There could be a
> clock
> with mux and ga
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Wed, 6 Feb 2013 10:52:54 +0100:
> > diff --git a/include/linux/clk-provider.h b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > index f0ac818..bb5d36a 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/clk-provider.h
> > @@ -346,6 +346,8 @@ struct clk_composite {
> >
On Wednesday 06 February 2013 11:40 AM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Wed, 6 Feb 2013 03:55:00 +0100:
No, clk_ops depends on the clocks you are using. There could be a clock
with mux and gate while another one with mux and div.
You are right. What about the following? We don't
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Wed, 6 Feb 2013 03:55:00 +0100:
> >> No, clk_ops depends on the clocks you are using. There could be a clock
> >> with mux and gate while another one with mux and div.
> > You are right. What about the following? We don't have to have similar
> > copy of clk_composite_ops
On Tuesday 05 February 2013 03:45 PM, Tomasz Figa wrote:
Hi Prashant,
Thank you for your patch. Please see some comments inline.
On Monday 04 of February 2013 13:41:22 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
Not all clocks are required to be decomposed into basic clock
types but at the same time want to use t
On Tuesday 05 February 2013 03:52 PM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Tue, 5 Feb 2013 09:33:41 +0100:
The members of "clk_composite_ops" seems to be always assigned
statically. Istead of dynamically allocating/assigning, can't we just
have "clk_composite_ops" statically as below?
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 11:22:52AM +0100, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> index f30fb4b..8f88805 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-composite.c
> @@ -27,6 +27,9 @@ static u8 clk_composite_get_parent(struc
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Mon, 4 Feb 2013 09:11:22 +0100:
...
If you want to consider the consistency for the other tegra
clk_register(), the following comment can be added although this is a
common function.
+ /* Data in .init is copied by clk_register(), so stack variable OK */
> + c
On Tuesday 05 of February 2013 11:22:52 Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
> Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Tue, 5 Feb 2013 09:33:41
+0100:
> > > The members of "clk_composite_ops" seems to be always assigned
> > > statically. Istead of dynamically allocating/assigning, can't we
> > > just
> > > have "clk_composite_o
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Tue, 5 Feb 2013 09:33:41 +0100:
> > The members of "clk_composite_ops" seems to be always assigned
> > statically. Istead of dynamically allocating/assigning, can't we just
> > have "clk_composite_ops" statically as below?
> >
> > static struct clk_ops clk_composite_ops =
Hi Prashant,
Thank you for your patch. Please see some comments inline.
On Monday 04 of February 2013 13:41:22 Prashant Gaikwad wrote:
> Not all clocks are required to be decomposed into basic clock
> types but at the same time want to use the functionality
> provided by these basic clock types i
On Monday 04 February 2013 03:07 PM, Hiroshi Doyu wrote:
Hi Prashant,
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Mon, 4 Feb 2013 09:11:22 +0100:
+struct clk *clk_register_composite(struct device *dev, const char *name,
+ const char **parent_names, int num_parents,
+
Hi Prashant,
Prashant Gaikwad wrote @ Mon, 4 Feb 2013 09:11:22 +0100:
> +struct clk *clk_register_composite(struct device *dev, const char *name,
> + const char **parent_names, int num_parents,
> + struct clk_hw *mux_hw, const struct clk_ops *mux_ops,
Not all clocks are required to be decomposed into basic clock
types but at the same time want to use the functionality
provided by these basic clock types instead of duplicating.
For example, Tegra SoC has ~100 clocks which can be decomposed
into Mux -> Div -> Gate clock types making the clock cou
19 matches
Mail list logo
