Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
In-Reply-To: <CAOMZO5DWpu9irOWR3rux-vV1sihfsDkTs5SJ7XXy8MgRBCd-Gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1553269010-15591-1-git-send-email-abel.vesa@nxp.com> <CAOMZO5DWpu9irOWR3rux-vV1sihfsDkTs5SJ7XXy8MgRBCd-Gw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/19] clk: imx: Switch the imx6 and imx7 to clk_hw based API
Cc:     Shawn Guo <shawnguo@kernel.org>,
        Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@nxp.com>,
        Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@nxp.com>,
        Lucas Stach <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
        Sascha Hauer <kernel@pengutronix.de>,
        "linux-clk@vger.kernel.org" <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
To:     Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@nxp.com>, Fabio Estevam <festevam@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <155493360763.20095.6174028293897341109@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
User-Agent: alot/0.8
Date:   Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:00:07 -0700
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Quoting Fabio Estevam (2019-03-22 09:24:54)
> Hi Abel,
>=20
> On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:37 PM Abel Vesa <abel.vesa@nxp.com> wrote:
> >
> > This work is part of the effort of switching the entire imx clock drive=
rs
> > towards clk_hw based API. In order to do that, we have to keep the old
>=20
> Maybe I missed some earlier discussions on this topic, but let me ask
> a fundamental question first: what is the motivation for this API
> change?
>=20
> I could not find the reasoning inside the series.

The reasoning should be added to the series, but I would like to see clk
providers only deal with clk_hw structures and not with clk structures.
This clearly divides the line between clk consumers and clk providers so
that we know if clk providers are using the clk API themselves. That's
why I introduced clk_hw_register() in the first place.