Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 11 Sep 2014 11:44:24 +0300 | From | Jyri Sarha <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] clk: add gpio gated clock |
| |
On 09/10/2014 01:14 AM, Mike Turquette wrote: > Quoting Jyri Sarha (2014-09-05 05:21:34) >> The added gpio-gate-clock is a basic clock that can be enabled and >> disabled trough a gpio output. The DT binding document for the clock >> is also added. For EPROBE_DEFER handling the registering of the clock >> has to be delayed until of_clk_get() call time. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jyri Sarha <jsarha@ti.com> >> --- >> >> This is my final attempt to get this generic gpio controlled basic >> clock into mainline. Of course I gladly fix any issues that the patch >> may have. However, if there is no response, I give up and move it to TI >> specific clocks. >> > > I searched through my archives and found a post from January. You Cc'd > me as "<mturquette@linaro.org>". Note that the address is wrapped in > chevrons but there is no name string (e.g. "Mike Turquette"). > > My mailer doesn't parse this well it was not flagged as to:me in my > filters. Maybe other mailers handle this better? If you leave out the > name string in the future then it would probably be best to drop the > chevrons. >
Then git send-email adds the chevrons, but in the future I'll put the name string there too.
>> I've been sending this patch as a part of Beaglebone-Black HDMI audio >> patch series since last autumn. Since the previous version I have done >> some minor cleanups and changed the clock's compatible property from >> "gpio-clock" to "gpio-gate-clock". All the file names, comments, >> etc. have also been changed accordingly. > > Is your platform the only one to take advantage of this clock type so > far? I feel that it is esoteric enough that it shouldn't be made > generic. > > The main reason is that all of the generic clock types needs to be > overhauled at some point. E.g. the clk-gate should have its > machine-specific logic separated from its machine-independent logic. If > the gate clock were to populate .enable and .disable callbacks and then > leave the actual register banging, or regmap'ing, or gpio'ing up to your > backend driver then that would be a big improvement and would avoid the > need to create this new clock type outright. > > So that's on my todo list, but it's not done yet. For your patch I think > that putting this code into drivers/clk/ti would probably be best, > unless other folks could use it as-is. Even if others could use it today > I would want to remove it eventually for the reasons stated in the > paragraph above. >
Ok, I see. I do not know of anybody else needing a gpio gate clock at the moment. I'll put the driver under drivers/clk/ti unless someone comes forward soon.
Thanks, Jyri
| |