From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754835Ab1LAOmV (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 09:42:21 -0500 Received: from cassiel.sirena.org.uk ([80.68.93.111]:35029 "EHLO cassiel.sirena.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752365Ab1LAOmU (ORCPT ); Thu, 1 Dec 2011 09:42:20 -0500 Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 14:42:05 +0000 From: Mark Brown To: Paul Walmsley Cc: "Turquette, Mike" , linux@arm.linux.org.uk, linus.walleij@stericsson.com, patches@linaro.org, shawn.guo@freescale.com, magnus.damm@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, amit.kucheria@linaro.org, richard.zhao@linaro.org, grant.likely@secretlab.ca, dsaxena@linaro.org, eric.miao@linaro.org, sboyd@quicinc.com, skannan@quicinc.com, linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org, jeremy.kerr@canonical.com, linux-omap@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, arnd.bergmann@linaro.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] clk: introduce the common clock framework Message-ID: <20111201144205.GA2103@sirena.org.uk> References: <1321926047-14211-1-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org> <1321926047-14211-4-git-send-email-mturquette@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Cookie: Big book, big bore. User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: broonie@sirena.org.uk X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on cassiel.sirena.org.uk); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 11:39:59PM -0700, Paul Walmsley wrote: > Clock rate/parent-change notifiers are requirements for DVFS use-cases, > and they must be paired with something like the > clk_{allow,block}_rate_change() functions to work efficiently. I intend > to comment on this later; it's not a simple problem. It might be worth > noting that Tero and I implemented a simplified version of this for the > N900. I'm thinking that if we're going to have clk_{allow,block}_rate_change() we may as well make that the main interface to enable rate changes - if a device wants to change the clock rate it allows rate changes using that interface rather than by disabling the clocks. I've got devices which can do glitch free updates of active clocks so having to disable would be a real restriction, and cpufreq would have issues with actually disabling the clock too I expect.