From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754449AbbAPK7j (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2015 05:59:39 -0500 Received: from mail-wi0-f176.google.com ([209.85.212.176]:65393 "EHLO mail-wi0-f176.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752595AbbAPK7h (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Jan 2015 05:59:37 -0500 Message-ID: <54B8EF15.4000602@linaro.org> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 11:59:33 +0100 From: Daniel Lezcano User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Alexandre Belloni CC: Thomas Gleixner , John Stultz , Nicolas Ferre , Boris Brezillon , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC 2/2] clocksource: don't suspend/resume when unused References: <1421399874-29119-1-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> <1421399874-29119-3-git-send-email-alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com> <20150116103530.GB3843@piout.net> <54B8EA54.5020002@linaro.org> <20150116104804.GE3843@piout.net> In-Reply-To: <20150116104804.GE3843@piout.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/16/2015 11:48 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > Hi, > > On 16/01/2015 at 11:39:16 +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote : >>> Isn't that already the case? >>> Right now, if you call clocksource_suspend, it doesn't matter whether >>> the clocksource has an enable or not, it will be suspended. Maybe I'm >>> mistaken but my patch doesn't seem to change that behaviour. >> >> Actually, if there is no enable/disable callback, then CLOCK_SOURCE_USED >> will be never set, hence the condition will always fail and the suspend >> callback won't be called. >> > > It is set in clocksource_enable/disable, even if there is no > enable/disable callback. Ah, right. But shouldn't we set the flag only if the callback is present and succeed as Boris mentioned it ? > I only found direct calls to ->enable() in > timekeeper.c, did I miss some? -- Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog