Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> I understand your concern, but I don't see why there should be any
> major difference in clock management code (clk tree wise), due to this
> patch. It worked before, so likely it will work now!?
It will ony work *differently*, it will change the clock management. It won't
break, but again it's *not* the purpose of the patch. The patch is aimed at
removing a warning.
As for the clock management, it will the change the behaviour :
Let's see the current clock management :
- pxamci_probe()
=> clock is disabled
mmc_add_host()
mmc_start_host()
mmc_power_up() (as pxamci is unaware of caps2)
Here the comment of the function is (drivers/mmc/core/core.c:1534):
"First, we enable power to the card without the clock running"
=> this won't be true if the clock is enabled in pxamci_probe()
mmc_set_ios(host, host->ios.clock=host->f_init)
pxamci_set_ios()
clk_enable()
=> here the clock is enabled, enable_count=1
mmc_host_clk_release()
pxamci_set_ios()
=> here the clock is disabled, enable_count=0
Let's see the your proposal clock management :
- pxamci_probe()
=> clock is enabled
mmc_add_host()
mmc_start_host()
mmc_power_up() (as pxamci is unaware of caps2)
mmc_set_ios(host, host->ios.clock=host->f_init)
pxamci_set_ios()
clk_enable()
=> here the clock is enabled twice, enable_count=2
mmc_host_clk_release()
pxamci_set_ios()
=> here the clock *remains enabled*, enable_count=1
- time passes with clock enabled
So I think there is a difference, unless my understand of the MMC core stack is wrong.
Cheers.
--
Robert
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
