[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130415155040.GD15837@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 16:50:40 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To: Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <liam.r.girdwood@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>, Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>,
linux-omap <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arm <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1] regulator: core: introduce regulator chain locking
scheme
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 04:03:35PM +0300, Grygorii Strashko wrote:
> To achieve this goal:
> - abstract regulator locking out into helper functions;
> - use the root Regulator (which has no supply defined, like regA) in chain to
> protect the whole chain;
> - implement regulator chain locking scheme as proposed by Thomas Gleixner for CCF
> re-entrance in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/27/171 and in the similar way as
> it is done for CCF by Mike Turquette in https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/3/28/512
Split this into separate refactoring and other change commits - one
change per commit.
> In addition, such locking scheme allows to have access to the supplier
> regulator API from inside child's (consumer) regulator API.
I've still not seen any use case articulated for doing this...
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists