[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <519461BB.3010209@codeaurora.org>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2013 21:34:03 -0700
From: Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>
CC: linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] clk: Disable unused clocks after deferred probing
is done
On 05/09/2013 11:35 AM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> With deferred probing, late_initcall() is too soon to declare a clock as
> unused. Wait for deferred probing to finish before declaring a clock as
> unused. Since deferred probing is done in late_initcall(), do the unused
> check to late_initcall_sync.
>
> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/clk/clk.c | 2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> index fe4055f..5ecb64c 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> @@ -534,7 +534,7 @@ static int clk_disable_unused(void)
>
> return 0;
> }
> -late_initcall(clk_disable_unused);
> +late_initcall_sync(clk_disable_unused);
>
> /*** helper functions ***/
Mike,
Thoughts? Picking it up? Removing the existing auto-disable code (I
think they are still useful)?
-Saravana
--
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum,
hosted by The Linux Foundation
--
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