On 01/16/2015 11:48 AM, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
Hi,
On 16/01/2015 at 11:39:16 +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote :
Isn't that already the case?
Right now, if you call clocksource_suspend, it doesn't matter whether
the clocksource has an enable or not, it will be suspended. Maybe I'm
mistaken but my patch doesn't seem to change that behaviour.
Actually, if there is no enable/disable callback, then CLOCK_SOURCE_USED
will be never set, hence the condition will always fail and the suspend
callback won't be called.
It is set in clocksource_enable/disable, even if there is no
enable/disable callback.
Ah, right. But shouldn't we set the flag only if the callback is present
and succeed as Boris mentioned it ?
I only found direct calls to ->enable() in
timekeeper.c, did I miss some?
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
