[PATCH 1/3] CLK: uninline clk_prepare() and clk_unprepare()
From: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com (Dmitry Torokhov)
Date: 2012-11-23 07:19:36
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 09:30:33AM +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 06:17:50PM -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:quoted
quoted
You've checked non-ARM architectures too?Yes: [dtor at dtor-d630 linux-next]$ grep -r HAVE_CLK_PREPARE . ./arch/arm/Kconfig: select HAVE_CLK_PREPARE Binary file ./.git/objects/pack/pack-7dad5ee164f601f1327dc78648fa317772c2d872.pack matches ./include/linux/clk.h:#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK_PREPARE ./include/linux/clk.h:#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_CLK_PREPARE ./drivers/clk/Kconfig:config HAVE_CLK_PREPARE ./drivers/clk/Kconfig: select HAVE_CLK_PREPAREErr, no you haven't, not with that grep. What you've found are the places which enable this, and say "yes, I have clk_prepare". What HAVE_CLK_PREPARE is about though is providing a transition path between drivers using clk_prepare() to platforms which _don't_ have a clk_prepare() implementation - and when it's unset, it provides a default implementation.
Ahh, I see. Then I think my first patch was correct albeit it had bad changelog message. If provided stubs for clk_prepare()/clk_unprepare() for platforms that did not define HAVE_CLK and pushed the check for HAVE_CLK_PREPARE down into drivers/clk/clk.c so __clk_prepare() would either call platform implementation or just be an empty function. Am I correct or I am still missing something? Thanks. -- Dmitry