From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: skannan@codeaurora.org (Saravana Kannan) Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 12:23:12 -0700 Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] clk: Disable unused clocks after deferred probing is done In-Reply-To: References: <1368124502-18830-1-git-send-email-skannan@codeaurora.org> <519461BB.3010209@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <51953220.6060207@codeaurora.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 05/16/2013 05:55 AM, Ulf Hansson wrote: > On 16 May 2013 06:34, Saravana Kannan wrote: >> On 05/09/2013 11:35 AM, 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. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan >>> --- >>> drivers/clk/clk.c | 2 +- >>> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c >>> index fe4055f..5ecb64c 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c >>> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c >>> @@ -534,7 +534,7 @@ static int clk_disable_unused(void) >>> >>> return 0; >>> } >>> -late_initcall(clk_disable_unused); >>> +late_initcall_sync(clk_disable_unused); > > Without giving this too much thinking... Will boot time be affected > with this change? > No, we are just reordering the steps. -Saravana -- The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation