On 04/28, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> This moves the pll-specific get_params and set_params functions into a
> per-pll struct that gets associated at init time and will help us reign
> in some code duplication we're faced with right now.
>
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko at sntech.de>
> ---
> drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> index e56637d..2c30f52 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/rockchip/clk-pll.c
> @@ -30,6 +30,14 @@
> #define PLL_MODE_NORM 0x1
> #define PLL_MODE_DEEP 0x2
>
> +struct rockchip_clk_pll;
> +struct rockchip_pll_data {
> + void (*get_params)(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll,
> + struct rockchip_pll_rate_table *rate);
> + int (*set_params)(struct rockchip_clk_pll *pll,
> + const struct rockchip_pll_rate_table *rate);
> +};
I'm not a huge fan of function pointer indirection on top of
function pointer indirection (clk_ops). It would be nice if this
was more flat design and different clk_ops existed for different
PLL types that all used the same rockchip_clk_pll structure. But
I don't care too much because I'm not looking at this code all
the time, so if you like this approach then I'm fine.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project
