Hi Sakari, On 10/09/2017 04:18 PM, Sakari Ailus wrote: > Sure, how about this at the end of the current commit message: > > If there is a need to support removing the clock provider in the future, > this should be implemented in the clock framework instead, not in V4L2. I find it a little bit misleading, there is already support for removing the clock provider, only any clock references for consumers became then stale. Perhaps: "If there is a need to support the clock provider unregister/register cycle while keeping the clock references in the consumers in the future, this should be implemented in the clock framework instead, not in V4L2." ? That said, I doubt this issue is going to be entirely solved solely in the clock framework, as it is a more general problem of resource dependencies. It could be related to other resources, like regulator or GPIO. It has been discussed for a long time now and it will likely take time until a general solution is available. -- Thanks, Sylwester
