On 07/02/2012 06:09 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote: > On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 1:34 AM, Prashant Gaikwad <pgaikwad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Thursday 28 June 2012 11:58 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: >>> We had some discussions in the past on your clock reset and external >>> line request operations which you've had to put into struct clk_tegra. >>> >>> Do you need to expose those ops to code in drivers/*? I consider that a >>> reasonable litmus test to start considering if something should be moved >>> into the generic clk.h api. >> >> >> Yes, we need these ops in drivers. Peter has sent a patch proposing to move >> these ops to generic clk. >> >> In addition, we also need mechanism/ops to change rate and parent from >> clk_ops implementation. There was some discussion but I do not know the >> latest status. >> > > Hi Prashant, > > OK, that is good to know. I haven't forgotten about this topic. I'm > still trying to think of the best way to expose less-common operations > to drivers... > > Based on Stephen's feedback in patch 0 I'll be waiting for another > version of this series before taking into clk-next. Oh, does this series depend on stuff in clk-next? I was intending to take it through the Tegra tree, since it definitely depends on (in complex ways through context if nothing else due to to large split/rename patches) a bunch of commits in Tegra's for-3.6/common-clk branch. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
