Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > linux.kernel > #1210586

Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and implement hand-off

From Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com>
Newsgroups linux.kernel
Subject Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and implement hand-off
Date 2015-08-20 17:20 +0200
Message-ID <pZzNg-fs-5@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References <pUVln-hs-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <pYRjb-293-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <pZzNg-fs-7@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw


[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw

On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 09:43:56AM -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> Quoting Maxime Ripard (2015-08-18 08:45:52)
> > Hi Mike,
> > 
> > On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 12:09:27PM -0700, Michael Turquette wrote:
> > > All of the other kitchen sink stuff (DT binding, passing the flag back
> > > to the framework when the clock consumer driver calls clk_put) was left
> > > out because I do not see a real use case for it. If one can demonstrate
> > > a real use case (and not a hypothetical one) then this patch series can
> > > be expanded further.
> > 
> > I think there is a very trivial use case for passing back the
> > reference to the framework, if during the probed, we have something
> > like:
> > 
> > clk = clk_get()
> > clk_prepare_enable(clk)
> > foo_framework_register()
> > 
> > if foo_framework_register fails, the sensible thing to do would be to
> > call clk_disable_unprepare. If the clock was a critical clock, you
> > just gated it.
> 
> Hmm, a good point. Creating the "pass the reference back" call is not
> hard technically. But how to keep from abusing it? E.g. I do not want
> that call to become an alternative to correct use of clk_enable.
> 
> Maybe I'll need a Coccinelle script or just some regular sed to
> occasionally search for new users of this api and audit them?
> 
> I was hoping to not add any new consumer api at all :-/

I don't think there's any abuse that can be done with the current API,
nor do I think you need to have new functions either.

If the clock is critical, when the customer calls
clk_unprepare_disable on it, simply take back the reference you gave
in the framework, and you're done. Or am I missing something?

Maxime

-- 
Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | NextNext in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> - 2015-08-20 17:20 +0200
  Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2015-08-26 09:00 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@st.com> - 2015-08-26 10:50 +0200
      Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2015-08-26 11:20 +0200
        Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@st.com> - 2015-08-26 11:40 +0200
          Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Lee Jones <lee.jones@linaro.org> - 2015-08-26 22:50 +0200
    Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> - 2015-08-29 05:50 +0200
  Re: [PATCH RFC RFT 0/3] clk: detect per-user enable imbalances and  implement hand-off Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com> - 2015-08-29 06:00 +0200

csiph-web