Re: [PATCH] clk: Use a separate struct for holding init data.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 10:39:24AM +0200, Sascha Hauer wrote:

> Can we please stop messing with the function prototypes? So you prefer
> passing a struct to clk_register which is fine and yes, it may have
> advantages. But do we really need to change the prototype? Why can't we
> just add a new function?

> I am generally open to do these changes, but we have come to the point
> where people actually want to *use* the clock framework instead of
> rebasing their stuff onto the latest patches.

Or at least wait until we've got somewhere with applying drivers so that
whoever is changing the APIs is responsible for updating at least the
in-tree drivers.  This would minimise the pain for people who've been
sitting waiting to get their stuff in which seems helpful.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [Linux for Sparc]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux