[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2013 18:11:03 -0700
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
CC: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 07/15] clocksource: Provide unbind interface in sysfs
On 04/25/2013 01:31 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> With the module refcount held for the current clocksource there is no
> way to unload the module.
>
> Provide a sysfs interface which allows to unbind the clocksource. One
> could argue that the clocksource override could be (ab)used to do so,
> but the clocksource override cannot be used from the kernel itself,
> while an unbind function can be used to programmatically check whether
> a clocksource can be shutdown or not.
>
> The unbind functionality uses the new skip current feature of
> clocksource_select and verifies that a fallback clocksource has been
> installed. If the clocksource which should be unbound is the current
> clocksource and no fallback can be found, unbind returns -EBUSY.
>
> This does not support the unbinding of a clocksource which is used as
> the watchdog clocksource. No point in fostering crappy hardware.
So.. if the clocksource you want to unbind is the highest rated
continuous clocksource that doesn't need a watchdog (basically what's
likely to be in-use and required to be unbinded), its likely to be
selected as the watchdog already.
ie: on a system that has only HPET/ACPI_PM, you can't unbind HPET, since
its a watchdog.
Or are you really wanting to prohibit this functionality for all
CONFIG_CLOCKSOURCE_WATCHDOG hardware, which would be easier to do via
build time ifdefs?
thanks
-john
--
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