[PATCH] clocksource: sirf/marco+prima2: drop usage of CLOCK_TICK_RATE

[Uwe Kleine-König]

Hi Danial,

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 10:07:05AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 09:00:52PM +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> > On 11/11/2013 09:20 PM, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > >As CSR SiRF is converted to multi platform CLOCK_TICK_RATE is a dummy
> > >value that seems to match the right value is used.
> > >(arch/arm/mach-prima2/include/mach/timex.h which defined CLOCK_TICK_RATE
> > >to 1000000 was removed in commit cf82e0e (ARM: sirf: enable
> > >multiplatform support); marco used the same file.)
> > >
> > >To not depend on that dummy value use a local #define instead.
> > 
> > I don't get this patch. It is to fix a compilation error ?
> No, the problem is that CLOCK_TICK_RATE used to be defined in a platform
> specific header <mach/timex.h>. For the ARM multiplatform stuff, this
> was dropped and now all multiplatform kernels use 1000000. For some
> platform (like SiRF) this happens to be correct, but actually it's pure
> luck. Further down the road I'd like to drop defining CLOCK_TICK_RATE
> for all platforms, so this is a preparing patch. But even independant
> from that it feels wrong to use a dummy value that was only introduced
> to prevent compile breakage.
> 
> Would this change log be better:
> 
> 	Since CSR SiRF was converted to multi platform in cf82e0e (ARM:
> 	sirf: enable multiplatform support) the symbol CLOCK_TICK_RATE
> 	isn't the platform specific definition any more, but a global
> 	dummy value. There was no harm introduced in cf82e0e because the
> 	global value happens to match the old platform specific one,
> 	still this dummy value isn't intended to be used and will
> 	hopefully disappear soon, so introduce a local #define and use
> 	that instead.
> 
> So it's not urgent, but would be a nice cleanup for 3.14-rc1.
I'd like to depend on this patch to drop CLOCK_TICK_RATE for
mach-prima2. Would it be ok for you when I include it in a pull request
to the arm-soc people? If not, do you intend to take that patch, or do
you still have objections? In that case I'd back out mach-prima2 from my
CLOCK_TICK_RATE change.

Best regards
Uwe

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Uwe Kleine-König            |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |