On 26 July 2014 01:32, Mike Turquette mike.turquette@linaro.org wrote:
So my opinion is to figure out how to specify the shared-clock versus independent-clock parameter it DT. I think the big issue here is the topology semantics around the cpus node, and I'll stay out of that stuff. But let's please not introduce a random API for a single merge window and let's also not over-consolidate machine driver code just for the sake of having fewer C files.
Returning almost after a month to this :(
- I agree that consolidation to cpufreq-cpu0 driver is good but adding a backend clk driver for that is bad. I would look around supporting callbacks to cpufreq-cpu0 driver. So that ->target()/->target_index() can be specified by platform drivers and rest of the code can be used. But that's the next problem to solve.
- Back to the first issue. How do we sharing information from DT ?
As I read them (and I may be wrong in understanding that), there were conflicting ideas from many..
Can we please decide how we want to see these bindings? So, that I can implement them quickly and close this thread...
Its just hanging in the middle as there wasn't a single clean solution yet.
-- viresh