On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 10:25:00AM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
...

However if you have the ability to use the clk_foo_register functions
please do use them in place of static initialization.  The static init
stuff is only for folks backed into a corner and forced to use it...
for now.  I'm looking at ways to allow for kmalloc'ing in early boot,
as well as reducing the number of clocks that my platform registers
during early boot drastically.

While I agree using registration functions rather than static
initialization will help make "struct clk" an opaque cookie, I also
see some benefit with using static initialization over registration
functions.  That is we will be able to initialize parents statically
rather than calling expensive __clk_lookup() to find them when using
registration functions.

I'm not sure if this will be a concern with the platforms that have
hundreds of clocks.  Keep it in mind, when we say one clock, there
are generally 3 clks behind it, clk_gate, clk_divider and clk_mux.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn