[linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 4/4] simplefb: add clock handling code
jonsmirl at gmail.com
jonsmirl at gmail.com
Wed Oct 1 10:54:21 PDT 2014
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 10/01/2014 07:05 PM, Mark Brown wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 02:48:02PM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> On Wed, Oct 01, 2014 at 01:32:50PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>>>> So don't do that if you're worried about it then, provide the bits of DT
>>>> that hook everything up from the start or otherwise describe things as
>>>> being in use.
>>
>>> "Otherwise describe things as being in use" doesn't work for clocks for
>>> example. And Mike already said he wasn't willing to add something like
>>> an always-on DT property for clocks.
>>
>> That's not the only way of doing things - another way would be to have a
>> stub driver that just holds the resources while working on getting a
>> full one in place for example.
>
> That won't work because the real driver which will eventually replace the
> stub one will likely be a module, and then we will loose video output
> between the kernel finalizing the initial boot, and the module actually
> loading.
Is this correct? Do the clocks really get shut off before a driver on
initrd can load?
I agree this is true if you wait until user space is fully up and
stick this driver out on a disk drive.
>
> We've been over all this again and again and again.
>
> AAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
>
> All solutions provided sofar are both tons more complicated, then the
> simple solution of simply having the simplefb dt node declare which
> clocks it needs. And to make things worse all of them sofar have
> unresolved issues (due to their complexity mostly).
>
> With the clocks in the simplefb node, then all a real driver has to do,
> is claim those same clocks before unregistering the simplefb driver,
> and everything will just work.
>
> Yet we've been discussing this for months, all because of some
> vague worries from Thierry, and *only* from Thierry that this will
> make simplefb less generic / not abstract enough, while a simple
> generic clocks property is about as generic as things come.
>
> This madness has to end! Thierry can we please have a clear and
> unambiguous NACK from you on having the clocks property in the simplefb
> dt node, and if you do so I expect a proof of concept patch from you
> with an alternative solution within a week, or can you please stop
> blocking this from getting merged?
>
> And again, if you believe this will cause some sort of dt compat
> issues or whatever, no one is making you use this property for
> your boards!
>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "linux-sunxi" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to linux-sunxi+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Jon Smirl
jonsmirl at gmail.com
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list