From: bilhuang@nvidia.com (Bill Huang)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC 1/1] clk: Add notifier support in clk_prepare_enable/clk_disable_unprepare
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 22:08:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1363151317.3311.9.camel@bilhuang-vm1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <514003B6.8020904@wwwdotorg.org>
On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 12:42 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/12/2013 07:47 PM, Bill Huang wrote:
> > On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 21:40 +0800, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> >> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 05:37:41AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> >>> Add the below four notifier events so drivers which are interested in
> >>> knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
> >>> in some of the DVFS (Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling) design.
> >>>
> >>> PRE_CLK_ENABLE
> >>> POST_CLK_ENABLE
> >>> PRE_CLK_DISABLE
> >>> POST_CLK_DISABLE
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Bill Huang <bilhuang@nvidia.com>
> >>
> >> NAK. *Sigh* NO, this is the wrong level to be doing stuff like this.
> >>
> >> The *ONLY* thing that clk_prepare_enable() and clk_prepare_disable() should
> >> *EVER* be doing is calling clk_prepare(), clk_enable(), clk_disable() and
> >> clk_unprepare(). Those two functions are *merely* helpers for drivers
> >> who don't wish to make the individual calls.
> >>
> >> Drivers are still completely free to call the individual functions, at
> >> which point your proposal breaks horribly - and they _do_ call the
> >> individual functions.
> >
> > I'm proposing to give device driver a choice when it knows that some
> > driver might be interested in knowing its clock's enabled/disabled state
> > change at runtime, this is very important for centralized DVFS core
> > driver. It is not meant to be covering all cases especially for drivers
> > which is not part of the DVFS, so we don't care if it is calling
> > clk_enable/disable directly or not.
>
> I believe the point Russell is making is not that the idea behind this
> patch is wrong, but simply that the function where you put the hooks is
> wrong. The hooks should at least be in clk_enable/clk_disable and not
> clk_prepare_enable/clk_disable_unprepare, since any driver is free to
> call clk_prepare separately from clk_enable. The hooks should be
> implemented in the lowest-level common function that all
> driver-accessible paths call through.
Thanks, I know the point, but unfortunately there is no good choice for
hooking this since those low level functions clk_enable/clk_disable will
be called in interrupt context so it is not possible to send notify. We
might need to come out a better approach if we can think of any.
Currently I still think this is acceptable (Having all the drivers which
are using our interested clocks call these function to enable/disable
clock in their runtime_pm calls) though it's not perfect.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-13 5:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-12 12:37 [RFC 1/1] clk: Add notifier support in clk_prepare_enable/clk_disable_unprepare Bill Huang
2013-03-12 13:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-03-13 1:47 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-13 4:42 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-13 5:08 ` Bill Huang [this message]
2013-03-13 5:24 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-13 5:40 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-13 18:10 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-14 2:15 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-14 9:21 ` Peter De Schrijver
2013-03-14 9:28 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-14 17:54 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-15 1:20 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-15 5:22 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-15 5:48 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-15 9:39 ` Peter De Schrijver
2013-03-15 10:08 ` Ulf Hansson
2013-03-15 12:06 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-15 12:33 ` Ulf Hansson
2013-03-15 19:38 ` Stephen Warren
2013-03-16 1:54 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-18 10:36 ` Ulf Hansson
2013-03-21 22:28 ` Mike Turquette
2013-03-16 2:23 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-15 17:12 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-03-15 17:09 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-03-16 2:25 ` Bill Huang
2013-03-15 16:59 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-03-15 16:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2013-03-15 18:44 ` Nicolas Pitre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1363151317.3311.9.camel@bilhuang-vm1 \
--to=bilhuang@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).