linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get()
Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 10:16:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F79DED3.4070007@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120402170858.GG24211@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>

On 04/02/12 10:08, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 10:04:03AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>> On 04/02/12 09:52, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>> On Mon, Apr 02, 2012 at 09:48:31AM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
>>>> I hope we get a better clk_get() implementation with the unified struct
>>>> clk. Don't get me wrong, clkdev is a great improvement over open coding
>>>> clock framework stuff in each platform. But clkdev is really just
>>>> another platform specific implementation
>>> Utter crap.  It is not platform specific.
>> It has compile-time platform hooks so it isn't entirely generic.
> Compile time hooks which are necessary to ensure safety of the provided
> struct clk.  You can't implement a clk_get() which doesn't have either
> knowledge of the struct clk or some kind of hook into platform specific
> code.  That's a hard and unarguable fact.
>
>>>> that most platforms decide to
>>>> use. Each platform has to select the option and it breaks if two
>>>> platforms implement __clk_get()/__clk_put() in conflicting ways.
>>> They should go away with the common clock stuff: they are there to deal
>>> with the implementation specific parts of struct clk, and as the common
>>> clock stuff sorts that out, these should be provided by the common clk.
>> Agreed. They should all be deleted and only one should exist.
> Utter crap.  Deleting them makes the non-common clock implementations
> unsafe.  If a struct clk is provided by a module (and we do have some
> which are) then the module reference count has to be held.  That's
> what these hooks do.
>
> When these platforms get converted over to the common clock, and the
> issues surrounding dynamically registered and removed clocks are sane,
> these hooks have to be used by the common clock to deal with the
> refcounting so that common code knows when the structures can be freed.

I'm saying that when every platform is using the common clock code we
would only have one __clk_get() implementation and we should be able to
delete clkdev.h entirely.

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.

  reply	other threads:[~2012-04-02 17:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-04-01 11:32 [PATCH 1/2] clk: Fix comment for end of CONFIG_COMMON_CLK section Mark Brown
2012-04-01 11:32 ` [PATCH 2/2] clkdev: Implement managed clk_get() Mark Brown
2012-04-01 15:26   ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-01 15:34     ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 16:48       ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 16:52         ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:04           ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 17:08             ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:16               ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2012-04-02 17:21                 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:34                   ` Stephen Boyd
2012-04-02 18:02                     ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:16         ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 17:30           ` Turquette, Mike
2012-04-02 17:04   ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-02 17:34     ` Mark Brown
2012-04-02 18:05       ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-01 13:02 ` [PATCH 1/2] clk: Fix comment for end of CONFIG_COMMON_CLK section Russell King - ARM Linux
2012-04-01 14:29   ` Mark Brown

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=4F79DED3.4070007@codeaurora.org \
    --to=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --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).