From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: viresh.kumar@linaro.org (Viresh Kumar) Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 16:47:47 +0530 Subject: [PATCH 39/41] clocksource: vf_pit: Migrate to new 'set-state' interface In-Reply-To: <6a6d4ec3156cb00537ed632f60430a37@agner.ch> References: <19859bd18fb69fa1f10c07de01b2259d@agner.ch> <20150703085749.GE23297@linux> <6a6d4ec3156cb00537ed632f60430a37@agner.ch> Message-ID: <20150703111747.GG23297@linux> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 03-07-15, 13:11, Stefan Agner wrote: > On 2015-07-03 10:57, Viresh Kumar wrote: > > On 03-07-15, 10:10, Stefan Agner wrote: > >> > .features = CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_PERIODIC | CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_ONESHOT, > >> > - .set_mode = pit_set_mode, > >> > + .set_state_shutdown = pit_shutdown, > >> > + .set_state_periodic = pit_set_periodic, > >> > >> I'm not really familiar with the interface, but given that we announce > >> the feature CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_ONESHOT shouldn't we add a set_state_oneshot > >> callback here? > > > > We weren't doing anything in pit_set_mode(ONESHOT) and so that > > callback is not implemented. In case you need to do something in > > set_state_oneshot(), we can add it back. > > True, weren't doing anything. I wonder if that is right. Afaik, we > should set the same timer for oneshot too, hence call > pit_set_next_event. With your change we can just reuse the same function > (pit_set_periodic) for set_state_oneshot. pit_set_next_event() will be called by clockevents core directly after tying to set the device in oneshot mode. And so no changes are required. > To maintain the atomicity of the changes, this would need to be fixed in > a separate patch anyway. So this change looks good to me: > > Acked-by: Stefan Agner Thanks. > I guess "clockevents: Allow set-state callbacks to be optional" makes it > before this patch? Otherwise we would call a null pointer... Yeah, I have mentioned this in the cover-letter that there are dependencies over clockevent core's next branch. -- viresh