[domen.puncer@telargo.com keeps bouncing on me, removed from Cc]

On Thu, 27 Mar 2008 09:33:01 +0000
Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:

quoted text
> On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 10:26:48AM +0100, Haavard Skinnemoen wrote:
> > You can extend the struct, put the rate there and use the same
> > getrate() function for all the clocks that need to keep track of the
> > current rate this way.  
> 
> Well, if you're really concerned about size, you could do what I did with
> PXA and introduce a struct clk_ops to contain all the constant function
> pointers, rather than mashing the function pointers together - which
> saves far more than trying to combine them.

I don't see what this has to do with the paragraph you quoted, but
yeah, good point. I don't think it should be used as an excuse for
filling up struct clk with platform-specific crap, however.

So how about something like this?

struct clk_ops {
	struct module	*owner;

	int (*can_get)	(struct clk *, struct device *);
	int (*set_parent) (struct clk *, struct clk *);
	int (*enable)	(struct clk *);
	void (*disable)	(struct clk *);
	unsigned long (*getrate) (struct clk*);
	int (*setrate)	(struct clk *, unsigned long);
	long (*roundrate) (struct clk *, unsigned long);
};

struct clk {
	struct list_head node;
	struct clk	*parent;

	const char	*name;
	int		users;

	const struct clk_ops *ops;
};

Haavard
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/