Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754764AbZG2Mvb (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:51:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754650AbZG2Mva (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:51:30 -0400 Received: from qw-out-2122.google.com ([74.125.92.27]:29393 "EHLO qw-out-2122.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751152AbZG2Mva convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:51:30 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=JmQ5YAgmGd1ga2bbEcs/5vM/LPdg61TQo6mMhNJw9yIQ6U+TSRI+iSL/SyXVxiapCc WDnyJZom774U8t2ATH5fGhGiR2gmXZfWIcavM+PkGkz8oy9fiEsyZDKiP8VLemY0ymCj MB2KBxW49nv8FuX3pyZg/5fHijS4WltyHmBXs= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20090729124233.GA12802@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> References: <4A6F033B.7030302@mnementh.co.uk> <20090729115817.GA12223@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> <20090729124233.GA12802@rakim.wolfsonmicro.main> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 21:51:30 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Re: MMC: Make the configuration memory resource optional From: Magnus Damm To: Mark Brown Cc: Ian Molton , Guennadi Liakhovetski , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Pierre Ossman , Magnus Damm Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2087 Lines: 45 On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 09:27:54PM +0900, Magnus Damm wrote: >> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Mark >> Brown wrote: > >> > While it's true that this doesn't bother SoCs the fact that most clock >> > API implementations don't allow any off-chip drivers to register clocks >> > renders the clock API essentially unusable for fairly large parts of the > >> Yeah, clocks outside the SoC are not well supported today. From what >> I've seen, most embedded boards come with external chips for cameras, >> audio codecs and/or phy devices. These devices often get their clocks >> from the main SoC. Allowing the drivers for such chips to use the >> clock framework to register clocks for internal divisors would allow >> driver writers to write better code which in turn would make life >> easier for most people hacking on embedded kernels. > > That's not actually abundantly clear for the audio stuff, or rather the > audio stuff would like additional features like constraint based > configuration. Without knowing too much about this, wouldn't camera sensors want similar features? >> The problem with the clock framework API is that the data structures >> varies depending on implementation. So the ops callback structure on >> SuperH is different compared to ARM. I suspect that adding generic >> clocklib support across the architectures will take quite a bit of >> time to implement propely. > > Indeed. ?It's actually much worse than you say, each individual ARM > architecture has its own clock API implementation of varying quality and > of course there are architectures that don't do the clock API at all. Yeah. This is exactly why I don't want to block on the clocklib implementation. Cheers, / magnus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/