From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de (Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?=) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 20:32:01 +0100 Subject: Locking in the clk API, part 2: clk_prepare/clk_unprepare In-Reply-To: <20110201170637.GR31216@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> References: <201102011711.31258.jeremy.kerr@canonical.com> <20110201105449.GY1147@pengutronix.de> <20110201131512.GH31216@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110201141837.GA1147@pengutronix.de> <20110201143932.GK31216@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110201151846.GD1147@pengutronix.de> <20110201152458.GP31216@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> <20110201155344.GF1147@pengutronix.de> <20110201170637.GR31216@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk> Message-ID: <20110201193201.GH1147@pengutronix.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 05:06:37PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 04:53:44PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 03:24:58PM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 01, 2011 at 04:18:46PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote: > > > > yeah, didn't thought about multiple consumers, so (as Jeremy suggested) > > > > the right thing is to sleep until CLK_BUSY is cleared. > > > > > > A simpler way to write this is: > > > > > > int clk_prepare(struct clk *clk) > > > { > > > int ret = 0; > > > > > > mutex_lock(&clk->mutex); > > > if (clk->prepared == 0) > > > ret = clk->ops->prepare(clk); > > > if (ret == 0) > > > clk->prepared++; > > > mutex_unlock(&clk->mutex); > > > > > > return ret; > > > } > > But you cannot call this in atomic context when you know the clock is > > already prepared. > > So? You're not _supposed_ to call it from any atomic context ever. My motivation for a more complicated clk_prepare was to make clk_prepare atomic when that's possible (i.e. when the clk is already prepared) and call it before the enable callback in clk_enable. Then everything behaves nicely even if clk_enable is called from atomic context provided that the clock was prepared before (or doesn't need to). If a driver writer doesn't know that a certain clock might need to sleep at some point he runs into an atomic might_sleep with your approach and with mine. Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig | Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |