From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Linus Walleij Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: agressive clocking framework v9 Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 10:40:22 +0100 Message-ID: <4CD7C586.6020809@stericsson.com> References: <43E4817426ED174AA81263BCECB4351D131D9D41BC@sc-vexch3.marvell.com> <041757E8-9FCD-4FA8-8079-7A3FC07E4038@marvell.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eu1sys200aog108.obsmtp.com ([207.126.144.125]:37795 "EHLO eu1sys200aog108.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751169Ab0KHJkp (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Nov 2010 04:40:45 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-mmc-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org To: Philip Rakity Cc: Nicolas Pitre , Ohad Ben-Cohen , "linux-mmc@vger.kernel.org" Philip Rakity wrote: > I am concerned that having the core/ layer ask for clocks off and on is > > a) not needed when h/w clock gating is enabled > b) may invoke bad behavior in the controller > c) is not optimal since the h/w is already handling this. So do not CONFIG_MMC_CLKGATE for this platform? I don't quite get it I think... Yours, Linus Walleij