On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 02:41:53PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote:On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 11:02:28AM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:Yes.No, the way to do this is to fix x86 to enable the clock API there. TheDo you mean enabling CONFIG_COMMON_CLK on x86?
x86 maintainers couldn't be bothered when I submitted a patch and
getting anyone to take a patch to make it available by default appears
to be unreasonably hard but perhaps if someone from Intel tries the x86
maintainers might take a patch...
I'm sure it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that we could solveWe shouldn't be adding special case code to every driver that might needI agree and it is cleaner to have the same API for all arches. However, I'm
a clock that gets used on an Intel system.
not sure how do we create the fixed clocks then? There is nothing in ACPI
namespace (or in the ACPI 5.0 spec) that allows you to describe clocks and
their relationships.
this problem...
So then we end up either:Well, it seems fairly clear to me that the SoC wiring ought to be done
1. Creating a custom board file for Lynxpoint which creates the
clocks. This is something I think x86 maintainers don't want to
see.
2. Creating the clock in the driver itself in its ACPI enumeration
implementation. This might work but it litters the drivers with
clock details.
Or is there something I'm missing?
outside the driver.
It is something that needs to be resolved for your smartphone SoCs for
this and for other things like platform data for external chips, what's
actually happening in practical systems here is that people are just
hacking the arch code as there's no mechanism for providing
configuration at present.