21.09.2020 14:12, Thierry Reding пишет: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 06:01:56PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > [...] >> It's still possible to add the clk-num checking, but it should be >> unpractical. We could always add it later on if there will be a real >> incident. Do you agree? > > There's also clk_bulk_get(), which allows you to specify the number of > clocks and their consumer IDs that you want to request. That seems like > it would allow us to both avoid the repetitive calls to clk APIs and at > the same time allows us to specify exactly which clocks we need. Would > that not work as a compromise? I'll change to use clk_bulk_get(), thanks.
