On Tue, 2018-10-09 at 08:37 +0000, Abel Vesa wrote:

+struct clk *imx_clk_composite_8m_flags(const char *name,
+					const char **parent_names,
+					int num_parents, void __iomem *reg,
+					unsigned long flags);
+
+#define __imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, flags) \
+	imx_clk_composite_8m_flags(name, parent_names, \
+		ARRAY_SIZE(parent_names), reg, \
+		flags | CLK_SET_RATE_NO_REPARENT | CLK_OPS_PARENT_ENABLE)
+
+#define imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg) \
+	__imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, 0)
+
+#define imx_clk_composite_8m_critical(name, parent_names, reg) \
+	__imx_clk_composite_8m(name, parent_names, reg, CLK_IS_CRITICAL)

Does anyone else think that the "8m" would be prettier next to imx
rather than as a suffix? Using imx8m_clk_composite* and
imx7ulp_clk_composite* makes more sense to me.

--
Regards,
Leonard