On Tue, 2018-10-09 at 08:37 +0000, Abel Vesa wrote: > +struct clk *imx_clk_composite_8m_flags(const char *name, > + const char **parent_names, > + int num_parents, void __iomem *reg, > + unsigned long flags); > + > +#define __imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, flags) \ > + imx_clk_composite_8m_flags(name, parent_names, \ > + ARRAY_SIZE(parent_names), reg, \ > + flags | CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT | CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE) > + > +#define imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg) \ > + __imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, 0) > + > +#define imx_clk_composite_8m_critical(name, parent_names, reg) \ > + __imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, CLK_IS_CRITICAL) Does anyone else think that the "8m" would be prettier next to imx rather than as a suffix? Using imx8m_clk_composite* and imx7ulp_clk_composite* makes more sense to me. -- Regards, Leonard
