Am Dienstag, den 18.12.2012, 16:36 +0800 schrieb Mark Zhang: > I think we don't need to define a pll_ops for every individual pll. > That'll be redundant. Just use one pll_ops(with parameter dynamically > calculating) which is able to serve several plls is OK. Refer to > tegra30_clocks_data.c, it has already implemented this. > This would be the right thing to do in the long run. But PLL_D requires a lot less complexity than others to compute the PLL values, because of the constraints that could be applied. That's why I started doing a simple function to only make PLL_D dynamic. I could certainly go ahead and come up with something which applies to all PLLs, but I imagine this might be even a bigger validation hassle for NVidia. Also I'm still not sure how much this patch collides with the clock rework. I don't know how far this rework has progressed already and I would like to avoid doing redundant work. Prashant could you please clarify? Regards, Lucas -- 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
