lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [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/
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-11 12:01    [W:0.116 / U:0.352 seconds]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site