On Sat, 2013-03-16 at 03:51 +0800, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 03/15/2013 11:45 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 02:31:04AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote:
> >> Add the below two notifier events so drivers which are interested in
> >> knowing the clock status can act accordingly. This is extremely useful
> >> in some of the DVFS (Dynamic Voltage Frequency Scaling) design.
> >>
> >> CLK_PREPARED
> >> CLK_UNPREPARED
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Bill Huang <bilhu...@nvidia.com>
> >> ---
> >> drivers/clk/clk.c | 3 +++
> >> include/linux/clk.h | 2 ++
> >> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> >> index ed87b24..3292cec 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
> >> @@ -550,6 +550,7 @@ void clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
> >> {
> >> mutex_lock(&prepare_lock);
> >> __clk_unprepare(clk);
> >> + __clk_notify(clk, CLK_UNPREPARED, clk->rate, clk->rate);
> >> mutex_unlock(&prepare_lock);
> >> }
> >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_unprepare);
> >> @@ -598,6 +599,8 @@ int clk_prepare(struct clk *clk)
> >>
> >> mutex_lock(&prepare_lock);
> >> ret = __clk_prepare(clk);
> >> + if (!ret)
> >> + __clk_notify(clk, CLK_PREPARED, clk->rate, clk->rate);
> >
> > So, on prepare, we notify after we've prepared the clock. On unprepare,
> > we notify after the clock has been shut down. Are you sure that's the
> > correct ordering? Would it not be better to view it in a stack-like
> > fashion, iow:
>
> > get
> > prepare
> > notify-prepare
> > enable
> > disable
> > notify-unprepare
> > unprepare
> > put
>
> Yes, these should be stacked/nested better for consistency.
>
> But for DVFS, the voltage needs to be raised before the prepare body is
> run, so that if clk_prepare actually enables the clock, the voltage is
> already at the safe level required by that clock. Similarly, for
> unprepare, you can only lower the voltage after having turned off the
> clock, which is guaranteed after the unprepare body. So, I think you
> want to move the notifier for prepare in the code above (and rename it
> to pre/before_prepare?), rather than the notifier for unprepare.
Oh yes I should raised notify before prepare body is run.
>
> In order to cover more cases, you might have both
> {pre,post}_{un,}prepare notifiers, although I'm not sure when you'd use
> the other two options.
Right, maybe {pre,post}_{un,}prepare will be useful.
>
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/clk.h b/include/linux/clk.h
>
> >> +#define CLK_PREPARED BIT(3)
> >> +#define CLK_UNPREPARED BIT(4)
>
_______________________________________________
linaro-dev mailing list
linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
