On 06/24/2013 07:47 PM, Peter Meerwald wrote: > Hello, > >> Hm, I wonder where we should draw the line between what should be >> implemented as a IIO driver and what should be implemented as a clk API >> driver. This one looks like it actually belongs into the clk framework. > > several IIO drivers have overlap with other kernel subsystems Which is not a necessarily good. > > I think the 'line' depends on the intended use/application of the driver, > not so much on characteristics of the hardware; why do you think it > belongs to clk? But the usecase might differ from board to board and that's when you get a problem. One user wants a clk driver another a IIO driver. > > the ds1077 is a small, separate chip which can generate a frequency; using > IIO I can easily control that frequency from userspace > > clk seems to be targetted more at integrated clocksources that get > activated automatically when needed by other components (maybe I am wrong) I think there is a userspace consumer for the clk API in the making. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-iio" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
