Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753456AbdFGXLs (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:11:48 -0400 Received: from mail.free-electrons.com ([62.4.15.54]:32806 "EHLO mail.free-electrons.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751435AbdFGXLq (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jun 2017 19:11:46 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 01:11:39 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: Daniel Lezcano Cc: Nicolas Ferre , Boris Brezillon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner Subject: Re: [PATCH 46/58] clocksource/drivers: Add a new driver for the Atmel ARM TC blocks Message-ID: <20170607231139.5dgzu3tc4lmuj43y@piout.net> References: <20170530215139.9983-1-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> <20170530215139.9983-47-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> <20170606152104.GC2345@mai> <20170606180559.pkrr7ux2qqnmsd6y@piout.net> <20170607141735.GH2345@mai> <20170607150908.kytgtzwgjjnxtsp3@piout.net> <20170607213810.GK2345@mai> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170607213810.GK2345@mai> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1237 Lines: 41 On 07/06/2017 at 23:38:10 +0200, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 05:09:08PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > I suggest to look what is in 'lot-of-things()' and especially what is doing > regcache_read(). > I know it does a lot... > May be you can reconsider the regmap? This driver is the only one use the > regmap AFAICT and I don't think it is adequate. > That is not true, I also converted the PWM driver and both a capture and qdec drivers are coming. > > > > > Can you explain why we have two clocks here? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Each channel have its clock, I can add a comment if you want. > > > > > > I don't understand. Why do we have two clocks? > > > > > > One channel is driven by one clock and the second one takes the overflow signal > > > from the first one, so no second clock is involved there, no? > > > > > > > Those are the peripheral clocks, they are not used by the counters but > > used to be able to read/write the registers. > > Mmh, strange. Why is the clk[0]'s rate used in this case? > That's abusing the fact that is has the same rate as the clock feeding the counter. -- Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering http://free-electrons.com