[PATCH v3 07/11] ARM: davinci - restructure header files for common clock migration

[Sekhar Nori]

On 11/6/2012 12:41 AM, Murali Karicheri wrote:
> On 11/04/2012 09:05 AM, Sekhar Nori wrote:
>>
>> On 10/25/2012 9:41 PM, Murali Karicheri wrote:
>>> pll.h is added to migrate some of the PLL controller defines for
>>> sleep.S.
>>> psc.h is modified to keep only PSC modules definitions needed by sleep.S
>>> after migrating to common clock. The definitions under
>>> ifdef CONFIG_COMMON_CLK will be removed in a subsequent patch.
>>> davinci_watchdog_reset prototype is moved to time.h as clock.h is
>>> being obsoleted. sleep.S and pm.c is modified to include the new header
>>> file replacements.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Murali Karicheri <m-karicheri2 at ti.com>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/devices.c           |    2 ++
>>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/pll.h  |   46
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/psc.h  |    4 +++
>>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/time.h |    4 ++-
>>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/pm.c                |    4 +++
>>>   arch/arm/mach-davinci/sleep.S             |    4 +++
>>>   6 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>   create mode 100644 arch/arm/mach-davinci/include/mach/pll.h
>> With this patch a _third_ copy of PLL definitions is created in kernel
>> sources. The existing PLL definitions in clock.h inside mach-davinci
>> should be moved to mach/pll.h and the pll.h you introduced inside
>> drivers/clk in 5/11 should be removed (this patch should appear before
>> 5/11).
>>
>> The biggest disadvantage of this approach is inclusion of mach/ includes
>> in drivers/clk. But duplicating code is definitely not the fix for this.
>> Anyway, mach/ includes are not uncommon in drivers/clk (they are all
>> probably suffering from the same issue).
> Sekhar,
> 
> I have replied to patch 5/11 that also refers to this. The main reason
> we are not able to do this cleanly is the code in sleep.c and pm.c. That
> is something related to Power management. Could you take a look and see
> if you can do some clean up on this code? I believe It is more than just
> moving the header files.

I am not sure what more is required than moving header files? Can you
elaborate?

> 
> Murali
>>
>> $ grep -rl "include <mach/" drivers/clk/*
>> drivers/clk/clk-u300.c
>> drivers/clk/mmp/clk-pxa168.c
>> drivers/clk/mmp/clk-mmp2.c
>> drivers/clk/mmp/clk-pxa910.c
>> drivers/clk/mxs/clk-imx23.c
>> drivers/clk/mxs/clk-imx28.c
>> drivers/clk/spear/spear6xx_clock.c
>> drivers/clk/spear/spear3xx_clock.c
>> drivers/clk/spear/spear1340_clock.c
>> drivers/clk/spear/spear1310_clock.c
>> drivers/clk/ux500/clk-prcc.c
>> drivers/clk/versatile/clk-integrator.c
>> drivers/clk/versatile/clk-realview.c
>>
>> pll.h can probably be moved to include/linux/clk/ to avoid this. Would
>> like to hear from Mike on this before going ahead.
>>
>> Anyway, instead of just commenting, I though I will be more useful and
>> went ahead and made some of the changes I have been talking about. I
>> fixed the multiple PLL definitions issue, the build infrastructure issue
>> and the commit ordering too.
>>
>> I pushed the patches I fixed to devel-common-clk branch of my git tree.
>> It is build tested using davinci_all_defconfig but its not runtime
>> tested.
>>
>> Can you start from here and provide me incremental changes on top of
>> this? That way we can collaborate to finish this faster.
> Thanks for offering some help. Yes I can provide you incremental patch.
> But then could you also help me to squash/rebase and send patches to the
> list for review?

No, no. I want you to own the submissions. Towards this, if it is easier
for you to build upon my work in your own tree, by all means, go ahead
and do it. Just share the branch/tree details so I can take a look and
contribute as well.

Thanks,
Sekhar