linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: balbi@ti.com (Felipe Balbi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 6/6] hwmon: OMAP4: On die temperature sensor driver
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 11:44:55 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110812084454.GD19467@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4E449D65.9000004@ti.com>

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 12, 2011 at 08:56:29AM +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote:
> On 8/12/2011 3:07 AM, Roger Quadros wrote:
> >On 08/11/2011 01:55 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 09:54:09PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote:
> >>>>>you need some other way to handle this. Why do you need to manually set
> >>>>>the rate rather than having hwmod handle this for you ?
> >>>>>
> >>>>>your argument that "it's a one time setting" is not enough to have this
> >>>>>in the driver. Drivers should not care about clocks anymore, this should
> >>>>>have been done on another layer.
> >>>>
> >>>>Hwmod will have no idea on the rate required.
> >>>
> >>>does the rate need to change ? Also, I have not mentioned hwmod anytime
> >>
> >>i did mention hwmod, nevermind that part. Still I'm not sure where is
> >>the right place to handle this.
> >>
> >
> >Aren't the omap_device_pm_latency callbacks the right place to do it?
> >
> >e.g. in the following snippet from mach-omap2/temp_sensor_device.c
> >
> >+static struct omap_device_pm_latency omap_temp_sensor_latency[] = {
> >+	{
> >+	 .deactivate_func = omap_device_idle_hwmods,
> >+	 .activate_func = omap_device_enable_hwmods,
> >+	 .flags = OMAP_DEVICE_LATENCY_AUTO_ADJUST,
> >+	}
> >+};
> >
> >instead of directly pointing activate_func to omap_device_enable_hwmods,
> >it could point to a function that sets the required clock rate and then
> >enables the hwmod.
> 
> FWIK, its a one time requirement to set the clock rate to the
> right rate the device can operate in based on what a platform
> supports. What you are suggesting would add the overhead of doing
> this every time the device is runtime enabled/idled.

if it's a one time setting, why don't you just change the clock fwk to
handle this nicely ? Maybe provide a different ->enable() function which
would already set the correct rate ?

Russell, what would be the best way here ? driver needs clock to be at a
particular rate for the device to work, but it's a one time setting and
I don't think driver should be doing clk_get() - clk_enable() -
clk_set_rate(), where should that functionality be put ?

-- 
balbi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20110812/e7038205/attachment-0001.sig>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-12  8:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1312979122-5896-1-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com>
     [not found] ` <1312979122-5896-7-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com>
2011-08-10 12:46   ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] hwmon: OMAP4: On die temperature sensor driver Felipe Balbi
2011-08-11  9:57     ` J, KEERTHY
2011-08-11 10:36       ` Felipe Balbi
2011-08-11 13:00         ` J, KEERTHY
2011-08-11 14:12           ` Felipe Balbi
2011-08-11 14:25             ` Rajendra Nayak
2011-08-11 14:32             ` J, KEERTHY
2011-08-11 18:54               ` Felipe Balbi
2011-08-11 18:55                 ` Felipe Balbi
2011-08-11 21:37                   ` Roger Quadros
2011-08-12  1:02                     ` J, KEERTHY
2011-08-12  3:26                     ` Rajendra Nayak
2011-08-12  8:44                       ` Felipe Balbi [this message]
2011-08-22 23:58                       ` Kevin Hilman
2011-08-23  4:18                         ` Rajendra Nayak
2011-08-23  6:42                           ` J, KEERTHY
2011-08-23 17:15                           ` Kevin Hilman
2011-08-24  4:07                             ` Rajendra Nayak
2011-08-11 16:38           ` Guenter Roeck

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=20110812084454.GD19467@legolas.emea.dhcp.ti.com \
    --to=balbi@ti.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).