Re: [patch 2.6.28-rc7] regulator: catch some registration errors

[David Brownell]

On Thursday 04 December 2008, Mark Brown wrote:
> [ Re Liam's comments about those non-existent cpufreq+regulator drivers ]
>
> On the bright side, looking at the situation with the clock API there
> don't seem to be any other substantial offenders here.  Most of the
> other users are part of the platform code and get to peer inside the
> clocking structure, so if cpufreq were fixed there shouldn't be much
> problem here.

Last time I looked, no cpufreq driver tried to use <linux/clk.h>
calls.  The reason was simple:  the clock framework code sits in
DRAM, so it can't be executed while changing DRAM clocks.

Those bits of cpufreq had to live in on-chip SRAM (there's usually
a few pages of it) and directly update PLL and other clock config
registers ... then wait for things to stabilize before they returned
and the CPU executed from DRAM again.

- Dave
 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/