On Friday 16 March 2012, Turquette, Mike wrote:
On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 3:21 PM, Paul Walmsley paul@pwsan.com wrote:
From: Paul Walmsley paul@pwsan.com Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 16:06:30 -0600 Subject: [PATCH] clk: mark the common clk code as EXPERIMENTAL for now
Mark the common clk code as depending on CONFIG_EXPERIMENTAL. The API is not well-defined and both it and the underlying mechanics are likely to need significant changes to support non-trivial uses of the rate changing code, such as DVFS with external I/O devices. So any platforms that switch their implementation over to this may need to revise much of their driver code and revalidate their implementations until the behavior of the code is better-defined.
A good time for removing this EXPERIMENTAL designation would be after at least two platforms that do DVFS on groups of external I/O devices have ported their clock implementations over to the common clk code.
Signed-off-by: Paul Walmsley paul@pwsan.com Cc: Mike Turquette mturquette@ti.com
ACK. This will set some reasonable expectations while things are in flux.
Arnd are you willing to take this in?
I think it's rather pointless, because the option is not going to be user selectable but will get selected by the platform unless I'm mistaken. The platform maintainers that care already know the state of the framework. Also, there are no user space interfaces that we have to warn users about not being stable, because the framework is internal to the kernel.
However, I wonder whether we need the patch below to prevent users from accidentally enabling COMMON_CLK on platforms that already provide their own implementation.
Arnd
diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig index 2eaf17e..a0a83de 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig +++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ config HAVE_MACH_CLKDEV
menuconfig COMMON_CLK - bool "Common Clock Framework" + bool select HAVE_CLK_PREPARE ---help--- The common clock framework is a single definition of struct clk, useful across many platforms, as well as an