On Tue, Dec 22, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Vladimir Zapolskiy <vz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 21.12.2015 18:41, Aleksey Makarov wrote:
>> +static int amba_handler_attach(struct acpi_device *adev,
>> + const struct acpi_device_id *id)
>> +{
>> + struct amba_device *dev = NULL;
>> + struct acpi_device *acpi_parent;
>> + struct resource_entry *rentry;
>> + struct list_head resource_list;
>> + struct resource *resources = NULL;
>> + bool address_found = false;
>> + int ret, count, irq_no = 0;
>> +
>> + /* If the ACPI node already has a physical device attached, skip it. */
>> + if (adev->physical_node_count)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + amba_register_dummy_clk();
>
> Since it is a single time dummy clock registration, may be it is better
> to move it to acpi_amba_init() or somewhere else? I understand that
> "apb_pclk" is wanted, but I'm not sure that this driver should serve as
> a clock provider.
Depends on actual hardware topology. Intel HW has few drivers that are
clock providers because they are really ones.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
