From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: plagnioj@jcrosoft.com (Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD)
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 12:35:25 +0200
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] clk: Disable unused clocks after deferred
 probing is done
In-Reply-To: <518D7CC3.6050000@codeaurora.org>
References: <1368076726-11492-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org>
 <1368124502-18830-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org>
 <20130510064520.GI3041@game.jcrosoft.org>
 <518D7CC3.6050000@codeaurora.org>
Message-ID: <20130522103525.GD9937@game.jcrosoft.org>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 16:03 Fri 10 May     , Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On 05/09/2013 11:45 PM, Jean-Christophe PLAGNIOL-VILLARD wrote:
> >On 11:35 Thu 09 May     , Saravana Kannan wrote:
> >>With deferred probing, late_initcall() is too soon to declare a clock as
> >>unused. Wait for deferred probing to finish before declaring a clock as
> >>unused. Since deferred probing is done in late_initcall(), do the unused
> >>check to late_initcall_sync.
> >
> >Nack for both regulator & clk
> >
> >you can not known when the clock need to be shutdown
> >
> >example display splash screen set by the bootloader and display as module
> >
> >Best Regards,
> >J.
> 
> You are joking right? This is already done in the kernel. If you
> don't want that, please rip out the code and try to get that picked
> up. I'm sending out this patch for fix what's currently in the
> kernel for those who care for the current feature.

so this feature is nightmare we need to KILL it

Best Regards,
J.
> 
> Regards,
> Saravana
> 
> 
> -- 
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
> hosted by The Linux Foundation