Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] clockevents: Introduce mode specific callbacks | Date | Fri, 13 Feb 2015 15:46:11 +0100 |
| |
On Friday, February 13, 2015 11:01:18 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > On 13 February 2015 at 10:11, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@rjwysocki.net> wrote: > > On Friday, February 13, 2015 08:54:56 AM Viresh Kumar wrote: > >> It is not possible for the clockevents core to know which modes (other than > >> those with a corresponding feature flag) are supported by a particular > >> implementation. And drivers are expected to handle transition to all modes > >> elegantly, as ->set_mode() would be issued for them unconditionally. > >> > >> Now, adding support for a new mode complicates things a bit if we want to use > >> the legacy ->set_mode() callback. We need to closely review all clockevents > >> drivers to see if they would break on addition of a new mode. And after such > >> reviews, it is found that we have to do non-trivial changes to most of the > >> drivers [1]. > >> > >> Introduce mode-specific set_mode_*() callbacks, some of which the drivers may or > >> may not implement. A missing callback would clearly convey the message that the > >> corresponding mode isn't supported. > > > > This is not going to fly AFAICS if you don't say what exacly you need it for. > > For this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/9/508
OK, I see.
-- I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
| |