lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jan]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: Locking in the clk API
Date
Hi Paul,

> No, the sleeping clock case is and always will be a corner case, and I
> have no interest in pretending otherwise. On SH we have hundreds of
> clocks that are all usable in the atomic context and perhaps less than a
> dozen that aren't (and even in those cases much of the PLL negotiation is
> handled in hardware so there's never any visibility for the lock-down
> from the software side, other architectures also have similar behaviour).

I'm not too worried about the corner-cases on the *implementation* side, more
the corner-cases on the API side: are we seeing more users of the API that
require an atomic clock, or more that don't care?

Cheers,


Jeremy


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-01-11 11:33    [W:0.140 / U:1.404 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site