Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Device Tree on ARM platform

[Holger Schurig]

> 1. implementers of the clock API which have not been subject
> to my rigorous review abuse it to the point of making the API
> essentially useless, and that causes Mark problems.

If that's a problem, when something needs changes. An API that 
can only be managed by implementers due to rigorous review lacks 
something, maybe easy-of-use, maybe documentation. Can it be the 
case that the current state makes you a single-point of failure?

If yes, I'd at least suggest better docs in linux/Documentation, 
e.g. describe the big-picture, the implementation and common 
cave-ats, e.g. why an approach "uniquely name every single 
clock ... makes the API pointless" doesn't work.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/