Quoting Manivannan Sadhasivam (2018-03-20 02:04:00)
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 06:10:03PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > + * nop.
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > + return 0;
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +const struct clk_ops owl_fix_fact_ops = {
> > > + .round_rate = owl_fix_fact_round_rate,
> > > + .recalc_rate = owl_fix_fact_recalc_rate,
> > > + .set_rate = owl_fix_fact_set_rate,
> > > +};
> >
> > Why can't you use the regular fixed factor clk code and ops?
> >
>
> That's going to be really messy. Since I'm having the clk_hw embedded inside
> owl_clk_common and using it for registering all the clocks, using generic
> fixed factor functions will be a different approach _only_ for this clock and
> it won't look good I guess. Also, it may become complicated with composite
> clocks.
>
> If you still want to use the generic fixed factor code, I can do that in
> next revision.
>
The qcom clk driver has support for the 'regmap' clk_hws and the
non-regmap based clk_hws. I suggest having a list of clk_hw pointers
that you register in a loop and then have other lists that you use to
register wrapper structs, etc. Otherwise we're left with a bunch of code
that's copy/pasted around.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
