Thread (128 messages) 128 messages, 19 authors, 2011-04-20

[RFC,PATCH 1/3] Add a common struct clk

From: Saravana Kannan <hidden>
Date: 2011-02-10 05:16:13
Also in: linux-sh, lkml

On 02/08/2011 10:41 PM, Jeremy Kerr wrote:

[snip]
+
+int clk_set_rate(struct clk *clk, unsigned long rate)
+{
Shouldn't you be grabbing the prepare_lock here? Set rate and 
prepare/unprepare would be working on the same shared resource (say, 
PLL). That was the reason we are making set_rate() sleepable too.

As a nice side effect, it will also enforce the "might sleep" nature of 
this API.

You should probably rename the lock to something else since it's not 
limited to prepare/unprepare. How about resource_lock?
+	if (clk->ops->set_rate)
+		return clk->ops->set_rate(clk, rate);
+	return -ENOSYS;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_set_rate);
+
+int clk_set_parent(struct clk *clk, struct clk *parent)
+{
+	if (clk->ops->set_parent)
+		return clk->ops->set_parent(clk, parent);
I'm not sure on this one. If the prepare ops for a clock also calls the 
prepare ops on the parent, shouldn't we prevent changing the parent 
while the prepare/unprepare is going on?

+	return -ENOSYS;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_set_parent);
+
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/include/linux/clk.h b/include/linux/clk.h
index 1d37f42..fe806b7 100644
--- a/include/linux/clk.h
+++ b/include/linux/clk.h
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
[snip]
+
+/* static initialiser for clocks */
+#define INIT_CLK(name, o) {						\
+	.ops		=&o,						\
+	.enable_count	= 0,						\
+	.prepare_count	= 0,						\
Do we need these inits? Doesn't check patch complain about initing 
static/global to 0? If it's generally frowned upon, why the exception 
here. I realize that checkpatch won't catch this, but still...
+	.enable_lock	= __SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED(name.enable_lock),	\
+	.prepare_lock	= __MUTEX_INITIALIZER(name.prepare_lock),	\
After a long day, I'm not able to wrap my head around this. Probably a 
stupid question, but will this name.xxx thing prevent using this 
INIT_CLK macro to initialize an array of clocks? More specifically, 
prevent the sub class macro (like INIT_CLK_FIXED) from being used to 
initialize an array of clocks?
+}
+
+/**
+ * struct clk_ops -  Callback operations for clocks; these are to be provided
+ * by the clock implementation, and will be called by drivers through the clk_*
+ * API.
+ *
+ * @prepare:	Prepare the clock for enabling. This must not return until
+ *		the clock is fully prepared, and it's safe to call clk_enable.
+ *		This callback is intended to allow clock implementations to
+ *		do any initialisation that may block. Called with
+ *		clk->prepare_lock held.
+ *
+ * @unprepare:	Release the clock from its prepared state. This will typically
+ *		undo any work done in the @prepare callback. Called with
+ *		clk->prepare_lock held.
+ *
+ * @enable:	Enable the clock atomically. This must not return until the
+ *		clock is generating a valid clock signal, usable by consumer
+ *		devices. Called with clk->enable_lock held. This function
+ *		must not sleep.
+ *
+ * @disable:	Disable the clock atomically. Called with clk->enable_lock held.
+ *		This function must not sleep.
+ *
+ * @get:	Called by the core clock code when a device driver acquires a
+ *		clock via clk_get(). Optional.
+ *
+ * @put:	Called by the core clock code when a devices driver releases a
+ *		clock via clk_put(). Optional.
+ *
+ * The clk_enable/clk_disable and clk_prepare/clk_unprepare pairs allow
+ * implementations to split any work between atomic (enable) and sleepable
+ * (prepare) contexts.  If a clock requires blocking code to be turned on, this
Aren't all locks blocking? Shouldn't it be, "If turning on a clock 
requires code that might sleep, it should be done in clk_prepare"? 
Replace all "blocking" with "sleepable" or "sleeping" in the comments?
+ * should be done in clk_prepare. Switching that will not block should be done
+ * in clk_enable.
+ *
+ * Typically, drivers will call clk_prepare when a clock may be needed later
+ * (eg. when a device is opened), and clk_enable when the clock is actually
+ * required (eg. from an interrupt). Note that clk_prepare *must* have been
+ * called before clk_enable.
+ *
+ * For other callbacks, see the corresponding clk_* functions. Parameters and
+ * return values are passed directly from/to these API functions, or
+ * -ENOSYS (or zero, in the case of clk_get_rate) is returned if the callback
+ * is NULL, see kernel/clk.c for implementation details. All are optional.
is NULL. See kernel... ?
+ */
+struct clk_ops {
+	int		(*prepare)(struct clk *);
+	void		(*unprepare)(struct clk *);
+	int		(*enable)(struct clk *);
+	void		(*disable)(struct clk *);
+	int		(*get)(struct clk *);
+	void		(*put)(struct clk *);
+	unsigned long	(*get_rate)(struct clk *);
+	long		(*round_rate)(struct clk *, unsigned long);
+	int		(*set_rate)(struct clk *, unsigned long);
+	int		(*set_parent)(struct clk *, struct clk *);
+	struct clk *	(*get_parent)(struct clk *);
+};
+
Thanks,
Saravana

-- 
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help