[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4DD6E90C.9030109@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 17:19:56 -0500
From: Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
To: Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>
CC: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] clk: Add simple gated clock
On 05/20/2011 02:27 AM, Jeremy Kerr wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Kerr<jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>
>
> ---
> drivers/clk/Kconfig | 4 ++++
> drivers/clk/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/clk/clk-gate.c | 41 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/clk.h | 13 +++++++++++++
> 4 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> index 0a27963..75d2902 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> @@ -9,3 +9,7 @@ config GENERIC_CLK
> config GENERIC_CLK_FIXED
> bool
> depends on GENERIC_CLK
> +
> +config GENERIC_CLK_GATE
> + bool
> + depends on GENERIC_CLK
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/Makefile b/drivers/clk/Makefile
> index 9a3325a..d186446 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/Makefile
> @@ -2,3 +2,4 @@
> obj-$(CONFIG_CLKDEV_LOOKUP) += clkdev.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_CLK) += clk.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_CLK_FIXED) += clk-fixed.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_GENERIC_CLK_GATE) += clk-gate.o
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c b/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..833e0da
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-gate.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,41 @@
> +
> +#include<linux/clk.h>
> +#include<linux/module.h>
> +#include<asm/io.h>
> +
> +#define to_clk_gate(clk) container_of(clk, struct clk_gate, hw)
> +
> +static unsigned long clk_gate_get_rate(struct clk_hw *clk)
> +{
> + return clk_get_rate(clk_get_parent(clk->clk));
> +}
> +
> +static int clk_gate_enable(struct clk_hw *clk)
> +{
> + struct clk_gate *gate = to_clk_gate(clk);
> + u32 reg;
> +
> + reg = __raw_readl(gate->reg);
> + reg |= 1<< gate->bit_idx;
> + __raw_writel(reg, gate->reg);
This should be protected with a spinlock for h/w access. You could have
a mixture of enable bits with divider fields in one register, so the
enable lock won't help here. However, you would have to find a way to
have a common spinlock for all accesses to the h/w.
Rob
--
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