Thread (126 messages) 126 messages, 18 authors, 2011-04-20

Re: [RFC, PATCH 3/3] clk: add warnings for incorrect enable/prepare semantics

From: Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@gmail.com>
Date: 2011-02-07 06:29:16
Also in: linux-arm-kernel, lkml

On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Jeremy Kerr [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
This change adds warnings to check for:

 1) enabling a clock that hasn't been prepared; and

 2) unpreparing a clock that is still enabled

While the correctness can't be guaranteed, these warnings should cover
most situations.

Signed-off-by: Jeremy Kerr <redacted>

---
 drivers/clk/clk.c |    4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c
index 51dbd33..2369959 100644
--- a/drivers/clk/clk.c
+++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c
@@ -35,6 +35,8 @@ void clk_unprepare(struct clk *clk)
       if (!clk->ops->unprepare)
               return;

+       WARN_ON(clk->enable_count);
+
       mutex_lock(&clk->prepare_lock);
       if (--clk->prepare_count = 0)
               clk->ops->unprepare(clk);
@@ -50,6 +52,8 @@ int clk_enable(struct clk *clk)
       if (!clk->ops->enable)
               return 0;

+       WARN_ON(clk->ops->prepare && clk->prepare_count);
+
Shouldn't the prepare_count be checked against 0 ?
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help