[RFC,PATCH 1/2] Add a common struct clk
Benjamin Herrenschmidt
benh at kernel.crashing.org
Sat Jun 12 01:12:53 EDT 2010
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 11:23 +0200, Lothar Waßmann wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > > Using a mutex in clk_enable()/clk_disable() is a bad idea, since that
> > > makes it impossible to call those functions in interrupt context.
> >
> > Do we do this at the moment? I know at least one implementation of clk_enable
> > uses a mutex for locking.
> >
> You are probably talking about the Freescale i.MX51 kernel, that won't
> even boot, if you enable CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL, CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK,
> CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCKDEP and CONFIG_DEBUG_SPINLOCK_SLEEP.
> The mutex in the clock implementation is one of the reasons.
Regardless. Clocks generally take time to enable. I don't believe doing
clock enable/disable at hard irq context is a great idea.
If you really want to do something like that, you can always use either
threaded interrupts, or if you know your clock is off, mask & defer your
handling to a work queue yourself.
Unless we have enough case of very fast switching clocks that would
really benefit for that but from my experience, when a device can issue
interrupts, it should have its clocks on, unless it's some kind of
"wakeup" interrupt in which case it can safely be delayed.
Cheers,
Ben.
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list