Re: [PATCH v2 14/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Refcount periph clock enables

[Olof Johansson]

Hi,

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 2:26 PM, Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Some peripheral clocks share enable bits.  Refcount the enables so
> that calling clk_disable on one clock will not turn off another
> clock.
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Cross <ccross@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra2_clocks.c |   35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  1 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra2_clocks.c b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra2_clocks.c
> index 196c249..2734889 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra2_clocks.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/mach-tegra/tegra2_clocks.c
> @@ -154,6 +154,12 @@ static void __iomem *reg_pmc_base = IO_ADDRESS(TEGRA_PMC_BASE);
>  */
>  static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(clock_register_lock);
>
> +/*
> + * Some peripheral clocks share an enable bit, so refcount the enable bits
> + * in registers CLK_ENABLE_L, CLK_ENABLE_H, and CLK_ENABLE_U
> + */
> +static int tegra_periph_clk_enable_refcount[3 * 32];

Given that this is always locked when incrementing/decrementing,
should it just be switched to an array of atomics instead?


-Olof
--
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/