From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com (Sebastian Hesselbarth) Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 10:39:21 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] clk: provide public clk_is_enabled function In-Reply-To: References: <1380881310-24345-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <20131005202430.GI10079@pengutronix.de> <20131005204208.GB28106@lunn.ch> <20131006090609.GK14747@book.gsilab.sittig.org> <20131006163011.GA30818@lunn.ch> <5251BD09.3050900@gmail.com> <20131006200223.32214.4440@quantum> <5251E334.2070008@gmail.com> Message-ID: <52527339.9090701@gmail.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 10/06/2013 11:04 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: > On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth > wrote: >> Of course, we can do clk_enable, read, clk_disable as said before - and >> given the amount of questions and misinterpretation, I think it is the >> saner way. > > Sorry for any misinterpretation on my end. I agree reading the > register(s) within a clk_enable/clk_disable-protected section is the > most sane option. Well, as you are not the only one misinterpreting the purpose, I guess it is more about the clk_is_enabled() function itself. Uwe was very right, that it will lead to patches using it in a wrong way. Using the common enable/disable functions does no harm to our workaround and we will use it. Thanks for taking the time to raise those questions and surface those critical interpretations early! Sebastian From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755215Ab3JGIj1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Oct 2013 04:39:27 -0400 Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com ([209.85.214.53]:37522 "EHLO mail-bk0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755168Ab3JGIj0 (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Oct 2013 04:39:26 -0400 Message-ID: <52527339.9090701@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 10:39:21 +0200 From: Sebastian Hesselbarth User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 To: Mike Turquette CC: Andrew Lunn , =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Uwe_Kleine-K=F6nig?= , Russell King , Jason Cooper , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Jason Gunthorpe , Ezequiel Garcia , Grant Likely , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: provide public clk_is_enabled function References: <1380881310-24345-1-git-send-email-sebastian.hesselbarth@gmail.com> <20131005202430.GI10079@pengutronix.de> <20131005204208.GB28106@lunn.ch> <20131006090609.GK14747@book.gsilab.sittig.org> <20131006163011.GA30818@lunn.ch> <5251BD09.3050900@gmail.com> <20131006200223.32214.4440@quantum> <5251E334.2070008@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/06/2013 11:04 PM, Mike Turquette wrote: > On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Sebastian Hesselbarth > wrote: >> Of course, we can do clk_enable, read, clk_disable as said before - and >> given the amount of questions and misinterpretation, I think it is the >> saner way. > > Sorry for any misinterpretation on my end. I agree reading the > register(s) within a clk_enable/clk_disable-protected section is the > most sane option. Well, as you are not the only one misinterpreting the purpose, I guess it is more about the clk_is_enabled() function itself. Uwe was very right, that it will lead to patches using it in a wrong way. Using the common enable/disable functions does no harm to our workaround and we will use it. Thanks for taking the time to raise those questions and surface those critical interpretations early! Sebastian