On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 07:01:50PM +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
quoted text
> While I have no strong feelings on this series one way or the other, the
> naming is a bit unfortunate. The clock device / clkdev naming is already
> in use as an extension to the clock framework and is used by a wide
> variety of embedded platforms already, with a pending patch to move it in
> to the generic namespace (grepping for clkdev will give you an idea). The
> idea behind that interface is similar in that it deals with the dynamic
> creation and teardown of clocks, but is decoupled from timekeeping.
> 
> It's also reasonable to assume that devices with dynamic clocks tracked
> through clkdev will wish to also use this interface in the timekeeping
> case, so it would be good to settle on something less ambiguous in
> advance.

Okay, I will take a look at that and try to come up with a better name
for the dynamic clock code.

Thanks,
Richard
--
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/