[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120712165418.GJ2772@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:54:18 -0700
From: Mike Turquette <mturquette@...com>
To: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...nel.org, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...ricsson.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: allow clocks without parents to change rate
On 20120712-12:50, Linus Walleij wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:42 AM, Mike Turquette <mturquette@...com> wrote:
>
> > This has been fixed in Pawell's patch, "clk: Check parent for NULL in
> > clk_change_rate".
>
> Yes, that'll probably work.
>
> A small nitpick though:
>
> I have slightly different semantics, Pawel's patch assigns zero if
> parent is NULL, then use that as fallback, whereas I check for the
> parent being NULL all the way. I was worried that the old sematics
> could change like this:
>
> So here it takes that:
>
> + if (clk->parent)
> + best_parent_rate = clk->parent->rate;
> +
>
> And I was cautious that if this changes the parent rate:
>
> + clk->ops->set_rate(clk->hw, clk->new_rate, best_parent_rate);
>
> Then this passes the old parent rate to the recalc function:
>
> + clk->rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, best_parent_rate);
>
> It has no side-effects on my system but I worried about
> others, so I just left the behaviour to re-read the rate from the parent
> every time if possible.
>
Thanks for looking into it. I think for now let's keep what we have and
we'll patch it up if bugs are reported.
Thanks again,
Mike
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
--
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