From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
To: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Cc: Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@gmail.com>,
Linux PM mailing list <linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@secretlab.ca>,
Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>,
Greg KH <gregkh@suse.de>
Subject: Re: [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Add generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 22:10:50 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <201104200010.50656.rjw@sisk.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110419215944.GA10031@linux-sh.org>
On Tuesday, April 19, 2011, Paul Mundt wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:42:26PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 19, 2011, Magnus Damm wrote:
> > > Do you have any plans to add support for multiple clocks per struct
> > > device? I had some plans to play around with that myself, but if we're
> > > moving the code to a common place then this obviously becomes a bit
> > > more complicated.
> > >
> > > It's rather common that each hardware block in an SoC is connected to
> > > more than a single clock. This needs to be managed by software
> > > somehow.
> > >
> > > So if the plan is to make to the code generic, how about allowing the
> > > architecture to associate clocks with each struct device somehow?
> >
> > Hmm. For now, my patchset generally reorganizes the existing code without
> > adding new functionality. Of course, it is possible to add new functionality
> > on top of it, but I'd prefer to focus on the "real" power domains support
> > first (which I think should be done in a generic way too).
> >
> Multiple clocks is not new functionality, it's the common case for the
> bulk of the platforms, and something that is already presently handled.
OK
> > The plan is to share as much code as it makes sense between platforms and
> > architectures.
>
> An admirable plan, but the framework needs to be able to provide at least
> the current required level of functionality in order for it to be
> adopted, too.
Sure.
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 09:57:28PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > @@ -24,23 +24,18 @@
> > #ifdef CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME
> > static int omap1_pm_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
> > {
> > - struct clk *iclk, *fclk;
> > - int ret = 0;
> > + int ret;
> >
> > dev_dbg(dev, "%s\n", __func__);
> >
> > ret = pm_generic_runtime_suspend(dev);
> > + if (ret)
> > + return ret;
> >
> > - fclk = clk_get(dev, "fck");
> > - if (!IS_ERR(fclk)) {
> > - clk_disable(fclk);
> > - clk_put(fclk);
> > - }
> > -
> > - iclk = clk_get(dev, "ick");
> > - if (!IS_ERR(iclk)) {
> > - clk_disable(iclk);
> > - clk_put(iclk);
> > + ret = pm_runtime_clock_suspend(dev);
> > + if (ret) {
> > + pm_generic_runtime_resume(dev);
> > + return ret;
> > }
> >
> > return 0;
>
> The before and after changes here are not functionally equivalent. You've
> gone from an explicit multi-clock scheme to a single encapsulated one via
> pm_runtime_clock_suspend().
You're refferring to the OMAP changes I suppose?
> Almost every single SH IP block is likewise abstracted in to a function
> and interface clock, and OMAP and others are where we modelled this
> abstraction on top of in the first place, so there are certainly users
> there too.
In fact, the shmobile runtime PM code in arch/arm/mach-shmobile/pm_runtime.c
uses only one clock right now.
Or am I missing anything?
Rafael
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-19 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 64+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-13 0:05 [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-13 14:17 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence Alan Stern
2011-04-13 16:15 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over Grant Likely
2011-04-14 23:12 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-15 14:38 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over Grant Likely
2011-04-15 14:39 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence Alan Stern
2011-04-14 18:20 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over Magnus Damm
2011-04-14 22:45 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-15 14:34 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence Alan Stern
2011-04-15 23:18 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 17:15 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence Kevin Hilman
2011-04-16 23:12 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-14 23:16 ` [RFC][PATCH 0/2] Remove __weak definitions of platform PM callbacks Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-14 23:18 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/2] shmobile: Use power domains for platform runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-14 23:19 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/2] PM / Platform: Use generic runtime PM callbacks directly Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 17:17 ` [RFC][PATCH] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence Kevin Hilman
2011-04-16 23:35 ` [PATCH 0/9] PM: Rework shmobile and OMAP runtime PM using power domains Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:36 ` [PATCH 1/9] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:37 ` [PATCH 2/9] PM: Export platform bus type's default PM callbacks Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:38 ` [PATCH 3/9] shmobile: Use power domains for platform runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:38 ` [PATCH 4/9] PM / Platform: Use generic runtime PM callbacks directly Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:39 ` [PATCH 5/9] OMAP2+ / PM: Move runtime PM implementation to use power domains Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:40 ` [PATCH 6/9] PM / Runtime: Add subsystem data field to struct dev_pm_info Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:42 ` [PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Add generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-18 19:59 ` [Update][PATCH " Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-19 10:18 ` [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Add generic clock manipulation Magnus Damm
2011-04-19 21:42 ` [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Add generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-19 21:59 ` Paul Mundt
2011-04-19 22:10 ` Rafael J. Wysocki [this message]
2011-04-19 22:20 ` Paul Mundt
2011-04-19 22:50 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-19 10:58 ` [linux-pm] [PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Add generic clock Mark Brown
2011-04-19 21:35 ` [linux-pm] [PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Add generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-20 11:57 ` [linux-pm] [PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Add generic clock Mark Brown
2011-04-16 23:43 ` [PATCH 8/9] OMAP1 / PM: Use generic clock manipulation routines for runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-18 8:18 ` Paul Mundt
2011-04-18 19:57 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-16 23:44 ` [PATCH 9/9] PM: Revert "driver core: platform_bus: allow runtime override of dev_pm_ops" Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:30 ` [PATCH 0/9] PM: Rework shmobile and OMAP runtime PM using power domains (v2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:36 ` [PATCH 1/9] PM: Make power domain callbacks take precedence over subsystem ones Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:37 ` [PATCH 2/9] PM: Export platform bus type's default PM callbacks Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:38 ` [PATCH 3/9] shmobile: Use power domains for platform runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:39 ` [PATCH 4/9] PM / Platform: Use generic runtime PM callbacks directly Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:41 ` [PATCH 5/9] OMAP2+ / PM: move runtime PM implementation to use device power domains Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:42 ` [PATCH 6/9] PM / Runtime: Add subsystem data field to struct dev_pm_info Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:42 ` [PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v2) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-27 21:48 ` [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v3) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-27 23:04 ` [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation Colin Cross
2011-04-28 0:58 ` [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v3) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-28 1:06 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-28 1:33 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-28 19:36 ` [Update x2][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v5) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-29 19:35 ` [Update x2][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation Stephen Boyd
2011-04-29 20:29 ` [Update x2][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v5) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-29 22:04 ` [Update x3][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v6) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-05-03 17:00 ` [Update x3][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation Stephen Boyd
2011-05-03 17:38 ` [Update x3][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v6) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-29 20:50 ` [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation Grant Likely
2011-04-29 21:07 ` [Update][PATCH 7/9] PM / Runtime: Generic clock manipulation rountines for runtime PM (v3) Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:43 ` [PATCH 8/9] OMAP1 / PM: Use generic clock manipulation routines for runtime PM Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-05-16 10:16 ` Kevin Hilman
2011-05-16 18:26 ` Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 21:44 ` [PATCH 9/9] PM: Revert "driver core: platform_bus: allow runtime override of dev_pm_ops" Rafael J. Wysocki
2011-04-24 23:36 ` [PATCH 0/9] PM: Rework shmobile and OMAP runtime PM using power Greg KH
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=201104200010.50656.rjw@sisk.pl \
--to=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=grant.likely@secretlab.ca \
--cc=gregkh@suse.de \
--cc=khilman@ti.com \
--cc=lenb@kernel.org \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-pm@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-sh@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=magnus.damm@gmail.com \
--cc=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
/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).