Quoting Shawn Guo (2012-11-28 17:51:36) > > The notifiers in the clk framework might be a better place for this than > > just simply hacking the logic into the .set_rate callback. > > Ah, right. How did I forget about that nice piece? > > > I haven't looked at the definition of hb_voltage_change but does the > > call graph make any clk api calls? Are you talking over i2c to a > > regulator? If so then you'll probably hit the same reentrancy problem I > > hit when trying to make a general solution. > > So, how is your "reentrancy in the common clk framework" series[1] > going on? Haven't seen any update since August. > I've begun to look at a dvfs api that builds on top of the clock framework, as opposed to using clk_set_rate as the dvfs api itself. This eliminates the need for reentrancy, at least for the dvfs case. I'll post more when I have it. Honestly the reentrancy stuff was just too ugly. I might try again some day but for now I'm thinking a less radical approach deserves consideration. Thanks, Mike > Shawn > > [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.ports.arm.kernel/182198 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe cpufreq" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
