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

[Jeremy Kerr]

Hi Uwe,

> This implies the warning is only issued on clocks that have a prepare
> callback.  If we want to enforce the new API the warning here shouldn't
> depend on clk->ops->prepare.  (clk_prepare and clk_unprepare need to
> be changed then to adapt the prepare_count even in the absence of
> clk->ops->prepare.)

Yeah, it's a decision about either adding a small cost to all clk_prepare()s 
(ie, adding cost when there is no prepare callback), or checking for the 
correct prepare/enable semantics for all clocks (even when it doesn't matter 
for that particular clock). I chose the first as more important, but happy to 
go either way here.

Cheers,


Jeremy
--
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/