Hi
On 2018/12/28 9:39, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Quoting Sugaya, Taichi (2018-12-25 17:35:27)
Hi
On 2018/11/30 17:31, Stephen Boyd wrote:
+ init.num_parents = parents;
+ init.parent_names = parent_names;
+
+ mcm->cname = clk_name;
+ mcm->parent = 0;
+ mcm->hw.init = &init;
+
+ clk = clk_register(NULL, &mcm->hw);
+ if (IS_ERR(clk))
+ goto err_clk;
+
+ of_clk_add_provider(node, of_clk_src_simple_get, clk);
+ return;
+
+err_clk:
+ kfree(mcm);
+err_mcm:
+ kfree(parent_names);
+}
+CLK_OF_DECLARE(m10v_clk_mux, "socionext,milbeaut-m10v-clk-mux",
+ m10v_clk_mux_setup);
Any chance you can use a platform driver?
Excuse me to re-ask you.
Why do you recommend to use a platform driver? Is that current fad?
Not exactly a fad. We've been doing it for some time now. From an older
email on the list:
Reasons (in no particular order):
1. We get a dev pointer to use with clk_hw_register()
2. We can handle probe defer if some resource is not available
3. Using device model gets us a hook into power management frameworks
like runtime PM and system PM for things like suspend and hibernate
4. It encourages a single DT node clk controller style binding
instead of a single node per clk style binding
5. We can use non-DT specific functions like devm_ioremap_resource() to map
registers and acquire other resources, leading to more portable and
generic code
6. We may be able to make the device driver a module, which will
make distros happy if we don't have to compile in all
these clk drivers to the resulting vmlinux
Great thanks for answering. I strongly understand.
#It takes a bit of time to send v2.
Best Regards,
Sugaya Taichi
