On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 12:39 AM, Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 26/05/14 15:21, Ulf Hansson wrote: >> On 23 May 2014 14:52, <srinivas.kandagatla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> >>> + bool explicit_mclk_control; >>> + bool cclk_is_mclk; >> >> I can't see why you need to have both these new configurations. Aren't >> "cclk_is_mclk" just a fact when you use "explicit_mclk_control". > >> I also believe I would prefer something like "qcom_clkdiv" instead. > > There is a subtle difference between both the flags. Am happy to change it > to qcom_clkdiv. I think this was due to me wanting the variant variables to be more about the actual technical difference they indicate rather than pointing to a certain vendor or variant where that difference occurs. It's a very minor thing though, if you prefer it this way, go for it. Yours, Linus Walleij -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
