On 12/17/2011 03:04 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
+void __clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
+{
+ if (!clk)
+ r
On 01/13/2012 08:39 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
On 12/17/2011 03:04 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner
wrote:
On Tue,
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On 12/17/2011 03:04 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner
>>> wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquett
On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 04:04:23PM -0800, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> While the original clk_hw suggestion was well intentioned, it just
> forces too many unnecessary dereferences and indirection. It also
> prevents static init of some fields as others have mentioned.
> Overall, it made the MSM clock
On 01/04/2012 08:07 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On 01/04/2012 07:01 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette
On 01/12/2012 04:48 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On 01/12/2012 06:04 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
On 01/04/2012 08:07 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Rob Herring
wrote:
On 01/04/2012 07:01 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring
wrote:
On 01/
On 01/12/2012 06:04 PM, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> On 01/04/2012 08:07 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Rob Herring
>> wrote:
>>> On 01/04/2012 07:01 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring
wrote:
> On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Ri
On 12 Jan 04, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On 01/04/2012 07:01 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> >> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> >>> On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, T
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 01/04/2012 07:01 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>> On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 201
On 01/04/2012 07:01 PM, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
>> On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner
wrote:
> On Tue,
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 05:01:43PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> > On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner
> >>>
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:32 AM, Rob Herring wrote:
> On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
>>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
>
> snip
>
> +/**
>>
On 01/03/2012 08:15 PM, Richard Zhao wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>> On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
snip
+/**
+ * clk_init - initialize the data structures in a struct c
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
> >> +void __clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
> >> +{
> >> + if (!clk)
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + if (WARN_O
On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 04:45:48PM -0800, Turquette, Mike wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> > On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
> >> +void __clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
> >> +{
> >> + if (!clk)
> >> + return;
> >> +
> >> + if (WARN_O
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
>> +void __clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
>> +{
>> + if (!clk)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON(clk->prepare_count == 0))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (--clk->pre
On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Ryan Mallon wrote:
> On 14/12/11 14:53, Mike Turquette wrote:
>> +void __clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
>> +{
>> + if (!clk)
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON(clk->prepare_count == 0))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + if (--clk->prepare_c
On Tue, 13 Dec 2011, Mike Turquette wrote:
> +void __clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
> +{
> + if (!clk)
> + return;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(clk->prepare_count == 0))
> + return;
> +
> + if (--clk->prepare_count > 0)
> + return;
> +
> + WARN_ON(clk->ena
On 14/12/11 14:53, Mike Turquette wrote:
> The common clk framework is an attempt to define a common struct clk
> which can be used by most platforms, and an API that drivers can always
> use safely for managing clks.
>
> The net result is consolidation of many different struct clk definitions
>
Hi Mike,
> + *
> + * @recalc_rate Recalculate the rate of this clock, by quering hardware
> + * and/or the clock's parent. It is up to the caller to insure
> + * that the prepare_mutex is held across this call. Returns the
> + * calculated rate. Optional, but re
20 matches
Mail list logo