[PATCHv2 1/9] at91: provide macb clks with "pclk" and "hclk" name

[Jamie Iles]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 10:00:10AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 11:22:37AM +0200, Andrew Victor wrote:
> > hi Russell,
> > 
> > >> There is no reference to a "pclk" or "hclk" in the AT91 architecture.
> > >> So to avoid possible confusion, maybe create two "fake" clocks both
> > >> parented to "macb_clk", and add a comment they're only for
> > >> compatibility with the AVR32.
> > >
> > > It doesn't matter what's in the documentation.
> > >
> > > What matters more than conforming to documentation is keeping the drivers
> > > in a clean and maintainable state without throwing lots of ifdefs into
> > > them.
> > 
> > I'm not saying the drivers need ifdefs, they should request both
> > "pclk" and "hclk" as suggested.
> > 
> > What I was suggesting is the platform clock setup on AT91 as:
> >     macb_clk
> >         |
> >         +-- hclk
> >         +-- pclk
> > 
> > rather than:
> >     pclk
> >         |
> >         +-- hclk
> 
> And what I've been saying all along is to make pclk a _dummy_ clock on
> the platform it doesn't exist for, rather than making it related in some
> way to another clock given to the peripheral.

Ok, so just to summarize, before my patches, at91 provides "macb_clk", 
whereas avr32 provides "pclk" and "hclk".

I've renamed at91's "macb_clk" to "pclk" and added a fake, unrelated 
"hclk".  It was suggested that the fake "hclk" should be a child of 
"pclk" but you're saying to leave it as I have it right?

Jamie