From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rajendra Nayak Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/11] OMAPDSS: add clk_prepare and clk_unprepare Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:06:38 +0530 Message-ID: <4FE96686.6000002@ti.com> References: <1340372890-10091-1-git-send-email-rnayak@ti.com> <1340372890-10091-6-git-send-email-rnayak@ti.com> <1340604478.12683.25.camel@lappyti> <4FE80C43.6090802@ti.com> <1340611133.3395.3.camel@deskari> <4FE85005.4090303@ti.com> <1340630090.3395.85.camel@deskari> <4FE941EA.7050108@ti.com> <1340693758.2093.15.camel@lappyti> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from na3sys009aog101.obsmtp.com ([74.125.149.67]:35043 "EHLO na3sys009aog101.obsmtp.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754145Ab2FZHgp (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jun 2012 03:36:45 -0400 Received: by obhx4 with SMTP id x4so9916403obh.0 for ; Tue, 26 Jun 2012 00:36:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1340693758.2093.15.camel@lappyti> Sender: linux-omap-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org To: Tomi Valkeinen Cc: paul@pwsan.com, mturquette@ti.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org On Tuesday 26 June 2012 12:25 PM, Tomi Valkeinen wrote: > On Tue, 2012-06-26 at 10:30 +0530, Rajendra Nayak wrote: > >>> So as far as I see, clocks are never handled in atomic context. Is >>> everything related to the base clk stuff already in mainline? Can I take >>> the clk_prepare/unprepare patch into my omapdss tree? >> >> Well the Common Clk framework is already in mainline, but we still don;t >> have CONFIG_COMMON_CLK enabled for our builds yet. So until we do so, >> clk_prepare/unprepare will just be stubs which do nothing. > > But if I understood correctly, clk_prepare and clk_unprepare are anyway > no-ops with dss clocks, even when CONFIG_COMMON_CLK is enabled? With CONFIG_COMMON_CLK enabled, they will do prepare use-counting with a mutex lock/unlock around it. > > My point was only to understand if I can safely take the patch into > omapdss tree, instead of it going through l-o, to avoid any possible > conflicts. yes, I don't see any issues with it going through dss tree. > > Tomi >