Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Jun 2010 11:58:39 +0200 | From | Uwe Kleine-König <> | Subject | Re: [RFC,PATCH 1/2] Add a common struct clk |
| |
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:23:56AM +0200, Lothar Waßmann wrote: > Hi, > > > > Using a mutex in clk_enable()/clk_disable() is a bad idea, since that > > > makes it impossible to call those functions in interrupt context. IMHO if a device generates an irq its clock should already be on. This way you don't need to enable or disable a clock in irq context.
> > Do we do this at the moment? I know at least one implementation of clk_enable > > uses a mutex for locking. > > > You are probably talking about the Freescale i.MX51 kernel, that won't > even boot, if you enable CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL, CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK, > CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP and CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP. > The mutex in the clock implementation is one of the reasons. I will have a look into this later today.
Best regards Uwe
-- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ | -- 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/
| |