Re: [PATCH v2] clockevents: Introduce mode specific callbacks

[Viresh Kumar]

On 13 February 2015 at 10:11, Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Friday, February 13, 2015 08:54:56 AM Viresh Kumar wrote:
>> It is not possible for the clockevents core to know which modes (other than
>> those with a corresponding feature flag) are supported by a particular
>> implementation. And drivers are expected to handle transition to all modes
>> elegantly, as ->set_mode() would be issued for them unconditionally.
>>
>> Now, adding support for a new mode complicates things a bit if we want to use
>> the legacy ->set_mode() callback. We need to closely review all clockevents
>> drivers to see if they would break on addition of a new mode. And after such
>> reviews, it is found that we have to do non-trivial changes to most of the
>> drivers [1].
>>
>> Introduce mode-specific set_mode_*() callbacks, some of which the drivers may or
>> may not implement. A missing callback would clearly convey the message that the
>> corresponding mode isn't supported.
>
> This is not going to fly AFAICS if you don't say what exacly you need it for.

For this: https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/9/508
--
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/