From: sboyd@codeaurora.org (Stephen Boyd)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] clk: Add tracepoints for hardware operations
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 18:07:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53B209E5.1050701@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140630205211.3d114169@gandalf.local.home>
On 06/30/14 17:52, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jun 2014 16:56:39 -0700
> Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>
>> @@ -483,10 +486,12 @@ static void clk_unprepare_unused_subtree(struct clk *clk)
>> return;
>>
>> if (__clk_is_prepared(clk)) {
>> + trace_clk_unprepare(clk);
> Does it make sense to do these when clk->ops->unprepared_unused or
> uprepare is not set?
>
> You can use DEFINE_EVENT_CONDITIONAL() and add as condition:
>
> clk->ops->unprepared_unused || clk->ops->unprepare
>
Neat. I don't know if we actually want to do that though. If we always
record an event even when the hardware doesn't support the operation we
get information about events happening to the clock from a software
perspective. If that isn't important, then we can probably just put it
under the if conditions.
>
>> if (clk->ops->enable) {
>> ret = clk->ops->enable(clk->hw);
>> if (ret) {
>> @@ -945,6 +965,7 @@ static int __clk_enable(struct clk *clk)
>> return ret;
> It may make even more sense to add the tracepoints within the if
> statement. Especially if you have a return on error.
>
>
Right. I was thinking that no "clk*_complete" event would mean there was
some error. Detecting that case is not so easy though. It may be better
to always have the completion event so we know how long hardware
operations take and so that error handling is simpler.
--
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-07-01 1:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-30 23:56 [PATCH] clk: Add tracepoints for hardware operations Stephen Boyd
2014-07-01 0:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-07-01 1:07 ` Stephen Boyd [this message]
2014-07-01 1:11 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-07-02 3:44 ` Mike Turquette
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=53B209E5.1050701@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).