[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1101101205130.5731@utopia.booyaka.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 12:06:13 -0700 (MST)
From: Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>
To: Jean Pihet <jean.pihet@...oldbits.com>
cc: mingo@...e.hu, trenn@...e.de,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...prootsystems.com>,
Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, rjw@...k.pl,
Jean Pihet <j-pihet@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: add OMAP support for the new power events
Hello Jean,
On Wed, 5 Jan 2011, Jean Pihet wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com> wrote:
>
> > If the latter, then it might make sense to put these
> > trace points into the functions that actually change the hardware
> > registers, e.g., omap2_dflt_clk_{enable,disable}(), etc., since a
> > clk_enable() on a leaf clock may result in many internal system clocks
> > being enabled up the clock tree.
> I agree with you it is better to track the actual clock changes instead.
> I propose to move the tracepoints to omap2_clk_{enable...} which
> enables all the clocks irrespectively of the installed handler.
Yes, that is a better place.
> Note about the clock handlers: omap2_dflt_clk_enable happens to be the
> handler for all controllable clocks but could that change in the
> future?
Yes, it certainly could.
- Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists