Hello Russell,
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 03:14:45AM -0600, Paul Walmsley wrote:
> > What it does remove is the need for internal core code to fake up a struct
> > device simply to access a clock. It also allows us to harmonize the
> > clock names, used internally in core code, with the hardware reality,
> > which uses unique names to identify clocks.
>
> That problem is already solved. clk_get_sys()
That solves the first problem, but not the second. Is there some reason
that OMAP core code (aside from the clkdev mapping structures in
mach-omap2/clock*.c) should know, or care, whether a platform device name
is bound to that clock?
On OMAP, we have uniquely-named clock lines in the technical
documentation. It is possible that other platforms don't have this. But
for us, I'd submit that it makes more sense for internal core code to
fetch a clock documented as "MMC1_FCLK" with:
c = omap_clk_get_by_name("mmc1_fck");
rather than:
c = clk_get_sys("mmci-omap-hs.0", "ick");
(* ideally, of course, we'd use "mmc1_fclk" rather than "mmc1_fck", this
is a legacy issue that has been left for a future patch.)
As a side benefit, it also makes our clock debugfs setup easier, so a
clock can be identified in the path as simply
/debugfs/clock/.../mmc1_fck/, rather than something like
/debugfs/clock/.../mmci-omap-hs.0-mmc1_fck/ or
/debugfs/clock/.../mmci-omap-hs.0/mmc1_fck.
Thoughts?
- Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
