From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: maxime.ripard@free-electrons.com (Maxime Ripard) Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2014 16:16:40 +0100 Subject: [linux-sunxi] Re: [PATCH 01/10] clk: sunxi: Add module 0 (storage) style clock support for A80 In-Reply-To: References: <1417588565-26215-1-git-send-email-wens@csie.org> <1417588565-26215-2-git-send-email-wens@csie.org> <20141206171322.GB12434@lukather> Message-ID: <20141207151640.GJ12434@lukather> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Sun, Dec 07, 2014 at 09:13:46AM +0800, Chen-Yu Tsai wrote: > > (Which makes me wonder why do we the same spinlock for all the > > instances of the mod0 clocks, but that's another story) > > Are you worried about contention? AFAIK we don't do anything > fancy in our code that would result in a major problem. > I was wondering the same thing a while ago. Yes. While I'm not overly concerned about a performance bottleneck, it does seems a bit odd to have a shared lock when there's no shared resources. Maxime -- Maxime Ripard, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 819 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: