linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] clk: introduce the common clock framework

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20120319070115.GC31410@S2101-09.ap.freescale.net>
Date:	Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:01:17 +0800
From:	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...aro.org>
To:	"Turquette, Mike" <mturquette@...com>
Cc:	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>, Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
	linaro-dev@...ts.linaro.org,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	patches@...aro.org, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...aro.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...aro.org>,
	Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>,
	Arnd Bergman <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/4] clk: introduce the common clock framework

On Fri, Mar 09, 2012 at 10:25:00AM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
...
> However if you have the ability to use the clk_foo_register functions
> please do use them in place of static initialization.  The static init
> stuff is only for folks backed into a corner and forced to use it...
> for now.  I'm looking at ways to allow for kmalloc'ing in early boot,
> as well as reducing the number of clocks that my platform registers
> during early boot drastically.
> 
While I agree using registration functions rather than static
initialization will help make "struct clk" an opaque cookie, I also
see some benefit with using static initialization over registration
functions.  That is we will be able to initialize parents statically
rather than calling expensive __clk_lookup() to find them when using
registration functions.

I'm not sure if this will be a concern with the platforms that have
hundreds of clocks.  Keep it in mind, when we say one clock, there
are generally 3 clks behind it, clk_gate, clk_divider and clk_mux.

-- 
Regards,
Shawn
--
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/