lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Locking in the clk API, part 2: clk_prepare/clk_unprepare
    On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 10:05:56PM +0900, Jassi Brar wrote:
    > 2011/2/1 Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>:
    >
    > .....
    >
    > > Do you plan to handle the case that clk_enable is called while prepare
    > > isn't completed (considering the special case "not called at all")?
    > > Maybe BUG_ON(clk->ops->prepare && !clk->prepare_count)?
    > Sounds better than the second option.
    >
    > > Alternatively don't force the sleep in clk_prepare (e.g. by protecting
    > > prepare_count by a spinlock (probably enable_lock)) and call clk_prepare
    > > before calling clk->ops->enable?
    > That might result in a driver working on some platforms(those have
    > atomic clk_prepare)
    > and not on others(those have sleeping).
    The first option has the same result. E.g. on some platforms
    clk->ops->prepare might be NULL, on others it's not.

    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: 2011-02-01 15:03    [W:2.831 / U:0.256 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site