Locking in the clk API
Jeremy Kerr
jeremy.kerr at canonical.com
Tue Jan 11 09:35:42 EST 2011
Hi Paul,
> Again, you are approaching it from the angle that an atomic clock is a
> special requirement rather than the default behaviour.
I'm not considering it a special requirement, but it's still a requirement
(that the called function does not sleep).
The problem with the inverse logic (clk_enable/clk_enable_sleepable) is that
now you've made the caller need to know what kind of clock it has, or might
have one day.
* For clk_enable/clk_enable_atomic, the decision is: is this call in an
atomic context?
* For clk_enable/clk_enable_sleepable, the decision is: might the clock code
have given us a sleeping clock?
Note that it's much easier to guarantee correctness for the first than it is
for the second.
Cheers,
Jeremy
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list