[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220525081754.5uj5fpwloq4gdi6o@pengutronix.de>
Date: Wed, 25 May 2022 10:17:54 +0200
From: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel@...gutronix.de,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] clk: expand clk_ignore_unused mechanism to keep only
a few clks on
On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 05:43:07PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 10:15:49AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 02:14:03PM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > Allow to pass an integer n that results in only keeping n unused clocks
> > > enabled.
> > >
> > > This helps to debug the problem if you only know that clk_ignore_unused
> > > helps but you have no clue yet which clock is the culprit.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Uwe Kleine-König <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
> >
> > I consider this patch really helpful, it helped me to debug a clk issue
> > without having to recompile the kernel for each bisection step.
> >
> > On #kernelnewbies I got some positive feedback for it (1629304050 < j_ey>
> > ukleinek: nice clk_ignore_unused patch, I added a pr_err there recently
> > to print the clocks that were being disabled).
>
> Any thoughts on this patch? Would be great if it makes it into the next
> merge window.
Back then I thought this patch could make it into 5.16, now 5.18 is
released and i didn't get any feedback on this patch :-\
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists