On 09/09, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Wednesday 09 September 2015 14:27:58 Magnus Damm wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 9, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > > Another issue is that this won't guarantee that the names are unique as > > > multiple DT nodes can have the same name. Instead of trying to generate > > > unique names, would it be possible to handle clock registration and > > > lookup without relying on names for DT-based platforms ? > > > > It would of course make sense to do that for the long run, but at the > > same time that sounds like major internal API rework since most > > functions operate on string clock names today. So for short term is > > the correct approach to use clock-output-names? > > I think Stephen and Mike should comment on that. >
We've been murmuring about moving away from string based parent child relationship descriptions for some time now. Nothing very concrete has come out though and I haven't thought about it in too much detail. Why can't we call clk_get() for the clocks that we need to find the name of, and then call __clk_get_name() on them? Doing clk_get() has the nice side-effect of ordering probe for different clock controller drivers so that things like suspend/resume are done in the correct order. -- Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-clk" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
