[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAKohpo=0cG1Bo8NgcrMVTLo=bDnUoD-R8fY5XKT=22X8bzRv2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 09:09:30 +0800
From: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linaro Kernel Mailman List <linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Kevin Hilman <khilman@...aro.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Preeti U Murthy <preeti@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>,
Linaro Networking <linaro-networking@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clockevents: Introduce mode specific callbacks
On 11 February 2015 at 18:38, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> I think its better to be strict; esp. with new interfaces. It avoids
> confusion.
>
> Suppose a driver writer sees these new methods and thinks to use one
> while still having the set_mode() one -- ie. he didn't actually read the
> comment. We'd better make sure he fails and goes back to read it.
Okay, does below diff looks good to you ?
diff --git a/kernel/time/clockevents.c b/kernel/time/clockevents.c
index e646fbe44b05..75d221c7e9cc 100644
--- a/kernel/time/clockevents.c
+++ b/kernel/time/clockevents.c
@@ -444,8 +444,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clockevents_unbind);
static int clockevents_sanity_check(struct clock_event_device *dev)
{
/* Legacy set_mode() callback */
- if (dev->set_mode)
+ if (dev->set_mode) {
+ /* We shouldn't be supporting new modes now */
+ WARN_ON(dev->set_mode_periodic || dev->set_mode_oneshot ||
+ dev->set_mode_shutdown || dev->set_mode_resume);
return 0;
+ }
if (dev->features & CLOCK_EVT_FEAT_DUMMY)
return 0;
--
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