LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org>
To: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mturquette@linaro.org,
	sboyd@codeaurora.org, kernel@stlinux.com,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] clk: st: New always-on clock domain
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 11:37:18 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150302113718.GG32347@x1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87vbij1vuk.fsf@free.fr>

On Mon, 02 Mar 2015, Robert Jarzmik wrote:

> Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> writes:
> 
> > On Sat, 28 Feb 2015, Robert Jarzmik wrote:
> >
> >> Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> writes:
> >>     it doesn't specify which usecase is not covered by CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED, it
> >>     says, up to my understanding, that is it another way to have to
> >>     CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED flag applied.
> >
> > Well that is exactly what we're doing.  Is there an issue with that?
> >
> > This is a way to do it at a platform level.  It means we can support
> > multiple platforms where clocksources have been switched around
> > without writing new driver code in drivers/clk/st.
> >
> > If you have something else in mind, let me know.
> >
> >>  2) I still fail to see why this is necessary
> >>     IOW why declaring the mandatory always-on clocks with the proper flag should
> >>     be augmented with a new clock list. Isn't the existing flag the generic way
> >>     ?
> >
> > I'm not sure what you mean by this, would you be able to expland a
> > little?
> >
> >> I might not understand the real motivation behind that of course, that's why I'm
> >> asking.
> >
> > Please bear in mind that we don't supply our clocks statically.  All
> > of the information is extracted from DT, so if the always-on
> > information does reside in there, where do you propose it comes from?
> 
> I thought the standard clock binding provided a way to set this flag. Now I
> crosschecked the binding, it doesn't ...
> 
> My point was I didn't want the flag to be settable from 2 different places,
> where consistency was to be kept across different device-tree leafs.
> 
> > We could just write this code inside our own driver and apply the
> > CLK_IGNORE_UNUSED at a local level, but that's not the generic
> > solution I am searching for.
> 
> All right, I'm convinced now I undertand the flag was not settable from
> devicetree binding before this patchset.
> 
> You can add to patch 3/4 :
> Reviewed-by: Robert Jarzmik <robert.jarzmik@free.fr>

Until told otherwise, I'm going to apply this onto the other
patchset.  This one has already been NACKed, due to DT push-back.

-- 
Lee Jones
Linaro STMicroelectronics Landing Team Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog

  reply	other threads:[~2015-03-02 11:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-02-24 17:33 Lee Jones
2015-02-24 17:33 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] ARM: sti: stih407-family: Supply defines for CLOCKGEN A0 Lee Jones
2015-02-24 17:33 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] ARM: sti: stih407-family: Add platform interconnects to always-on clk domain Lee Jones
2015-02-24 17:33 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] clk: Provide an always-on clock domain framework Lee Jones
2015-02-24 17:33 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] clk: dt: Introduce always-on clock domain documentation Lee Jones
2015-02-24 17:42 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] clk: st: New always-on clock domain Lee Jones
2015-02-27 21:37 ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-02-27 21:49   ` Lee Jones
2015-02-27 23:38     ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-03-02  8:30       ` Lee Jones
2015-03-02 11:29         ` Robert Jarzmik
2015-03-02 11:37           ` Lee Jones [this message]
2015-03-04 12:00 ` Lee Jones
2015-03-06 19:08   ` Mike Turquette
2015-03-09  9:28     ` Lee Jones
2015-03-25  4:11       ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-03-26 13:51         ` Lee Jones
2015-03-26 16:55           ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-03-26 19:38             ` Lee Jones
2015-04-02  8:31               ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-04-02 10:48                 ` Lee Jones

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150302113718.GG32347@x1 \
    --to=lee.jones@linaro.org \
    --cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel@stlinux.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mturquette@linaro.org \
    --cc=robert.jarzmik@free.fr \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH v3 0/4] clk: st: New always-on clock domain' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).