Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1425738 > unrolled thread

Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: samsung: cpu: prepare for adding Exynos5433 CPU clocks

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: samsung: cpu: prepare for adding Exynos5433 CPU clocks Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 17:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: samsung: cpu: prepare for adding Exynos5433 CPU  clocks Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com> - 2016-06-20 16:10 +0200

#1425738 — Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: samsung: cpu: prepare for adding Exynos5433 CPU clocks

Hi Bart,

2016-05-24 22:19 GMT+09:00 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>:
> Exynos5433 uses different register layout for CPU clock registers
> than earlier SoCs so add new code for handling this layout.  Also
> add new CLK_CPU_HAS_E5433_REGS_LAYOUT flag to request using it.

Have you considered abstracting this? Comparing existing code with
newly added one, the differences don't really seem to be that huge and
it looks like there is more common code than different, except maybe
some numeric constants that could be put into a struct.

Best regards,
Tomasz

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1426637 — Re: [PATCH 2/3] clk: samsung: cpu: prepare for adding Exynos5433 CPU clocks

On Saturday, June 18, 2016 11:53:36 PM Tomasz Figa wrote:
> Hi Bart,

Hi Tomek,

> 2016-05-24 22:19 GMT+09:00 Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@samsung.com>:
> > Exynos5433 uses different register layout for CPU clock registers
> > than earlier SoCs so add new code for handling this layout.  Also
> > add new CLK_CPU_HAS_E5433_REGS_LAYOUT flag to request using it.
> 
> Have you considered abstracting this? Comparing existing code with

Yes, I have considered abstracting this but I've decided that there is
sufficient number of differences to justify adding new code.

> newly added one, the differences don't really seem to be that huge and
> it looks like there is more common code than different, except maybe
> some numeric constants that could be put into a struct.

It is not only that, HPM clock sourcing checking would also need to be
abstracted somehow.  Anyway there is not a lot of new code and it so
much easier to follow by not being shared that I would prefer to keep
it that way.

Best regards,
--
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web