On 13.09.2023 13:14, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 13/09/2023 12:48, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >> On 13.09.2023 10:53, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> On 13/09/2023 10:47, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>>> On 13.09.2023 09:07, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>>>> On 12/09/2023 15:31, Konrad Dybcio wrote: >>>>>> These clocks are now handled from within the icc framework and are >>>>> >>>>> That's a driver behavior, not hardware. >>>> I believe we've been over this already.. >>>> >>>> The rationale behind this change is: that hardware, which falls >>>> under the "interconnect" class, was previously misrepresented as >>>> a bunch of clocks. There are clocks underneath, but accessing them >>>> directly would be equivalent to e.g. circumventing the PHY subsystem >>>> and initializing your UFS PHY from within the UFS device. >>> >>> And every time one write such commit msg, how should we remember there >>> is some exception and actually it is about clock representation not CCF >>> or ICC framework. >> So is your reply essentially "fine, but please make it clear in >> each commit message"? > > I am fine with this change. If commit msg had such statement, I would > not have doubts :/ Ok, I'll resend, thanks for confirming! Konrad
