LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Colin Cross <ccross@android.com>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org,
	Russell King <linux@arm.linux.org.uk>,
	konkers@android.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	olof@lixom.net, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Add shared bus clock type
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2011 14:03:07 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikFiZ+wVJ5CWG=Lfnexs-YQs29dtyv_1QDuXBYz@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D5C46D7.1040903@codeaurora.org>

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> On 02/16/2011 01:01 PM, Colin Cross wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> What do you do if clk_set_rate() fails? Should you unwind all the state
>>> such as the rate and if it's enabled/disabled? Or is it safe to say
>>> clk_set_rate() can't fail unless the kernel is buggy in which case why
>>> aren't all those return -E* in the set rate functions just BUG_ONs?
>>
>> In general, clk_set_rate can fail and return an error, but in this
>> case the failure may not be directly related to the driver that called
>> into tegra_clk_shared_bus_update.  For example, if clk_disable is
>> called on a shared clock handle, the rate may drop to the rate
>> requested by another shared clock handle.  clk_disable cannot fail, so
>> there's nothing that could be done with the return code, and the
>> problem was not caused by the driver that called clk_disable, so an
>> error would be meaningless.
>>
>>
>> I will modify tegra_clk_shared_bus_update to BUG on a failed
>> clk_set_rate,
>
> Yes, currently if there are any errors we can't determine which clock's
> vote is causing the error since the rate only takes effect when the
> clock is enabled and another clock could have updated their rate while
> the list is being iterated over.
>
> The code could be written so that we only call clk_set_rate() on the
> parent when the calling clock affects the aggregate rate. That would
> allow us to catch errors for the clk_enable() path and the
> clk_set_rate() path when the clock is already on. In the clk_disable()
> path we could just ignore the errors since we can't do anything anyways
> like you say. The only path that doesn't seem possible is clk_set_rate()
> when the clock is off which presumably doesn't actually matter since
> when you turn the clock on it will fail the same way (delayed
> clk_set_rate?).
>
> BTW, is there a race there in the rate updating code? Say clock 1 is
> enabled with rate 2 on cpu1 and clock 2 is enabled at the same time with
> rate 3 (currently the greatest rate) on cpu2. clock 1 is iterating over
> the list and sees that clock 2 is enabled so it calculates 3 as the max.
> clock 2 then returns from the enable call and then a call to disable
> clock 2 comes in. clock 1 is still iterating over the list and clock 2's
> call to disable runs to completion. clock 1 finally stops iterating over
> the list and has an aggregated rate of 3 (since it saw that clock 2 was
> on which is no longer true). It then calls set_rate() with 3 even though
> the only clock that is on is clock 1 with a rate of 2.
>
> c1 and c2 are off initially
>
> CPU1                    CPU2
> ----                    -----
> clk_set_rate(c1, 2)     clk_set_rate(c2, 3)
> clk_enable(c1)          clk_enable(c2)
> max == 3                max == 3; clk_set_rate(parent, 3)
> ...                     clk_disable(c2)
>                        max == 2; clk_set_rate(parent, 2)
> clk_set_rate(parent, 3)
>
> I think you need some kind of lock while iterating to stop the shared
> clocks from changing underneath you.
Yes, it needs a lock.  I missed adding it when I converted from a
global lock to a per-clock lock.  The children should lock the parent
before changing any of their state or calling
tegra_clk_shared_bus_update.

>> and modify tegra_clk_shared_bus_set_rate to
>> call clk_round_rate on the parent to ensure that the requested rate is valid.
>>
>
> I would hope clk_round_rate() isn't necessary to get a valid rate.
> clk_set_rate() shouldn't require exact/valid rates. clk_round_rate() is
> there to help drivers determine if calling clk_set_rate() with a certain
> rate is going to give them something they want. It's like saying "If I
> call clk_set_rate() with 500Hz what would the clock's rate actually be
> after the call returns?" If the set_rate implementation needs to round
> internally to find a divider or something, it should be done in the
> set_rate code and not in each driver.

The point is not to get the valid rate, it is to weed out rates that
will be rejected (not rounded) by clk_set_rate, without affecting the
clock.  If clk_set_rate will return an error, clk_round_rate should
also return an error.

>>>
>>> Shouldn't you call clk_enable(c->parent)? And do you need to check for
>>> errors from clk_enable()?
>>
>> clk_enable on the parent is handled by the clock op implementation in
>> mach-tegra/clock.c
>>
>
> Oops, thanks. Time to visit the optometrist.
>
> --
> Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
> The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tegra" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>

  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-16 22:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <1297590033-15035-1-git-send-email-ccross@android.com>
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 01/21] ARM: tegra: clock: enable clk reset for non-peripheral clocks Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 02/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Don't BUG on changing an enabled PLL Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 03/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Drop debugging Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 04/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Don't use PLL lock bits Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 05/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Disable clocks left on by bootloader Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 06/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Initialize clocks that have no enable Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 07/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Drop CPU dvfs Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 08/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Rearrange static clock tables Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 09/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Move unshared clk struct members into union Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 10/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Convert global lock to a lock per clock Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 11/21] ARM: tegra: cpufreq: Take an extra reference to pllx Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 12/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Add shared bus clock type Colin Cross
2011-02-16 20:34   ` Stephen Boyd
2011-02-16 21:01     ` Colin Cross
2011-02-16 21:51       ` Stephen Boyd
2011-02-16 22:03         ` Colin Cross [this message]
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 13/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Remove unnecessary uses of #ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_FS Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 14/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Refcount periph clock enables Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 15/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Round rate before setting rate Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 16/21] ARM: tegra: Add external memory controller driver Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 17/21] ARM: tegra: clocks: Add emc scaling Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 18/21] ARM: tegra: cpufreq: Adjust memory frequency with cpu frequency Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 19/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Add function to set SDMMC tap delay Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 20/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Fix clock issues in suspend Colin Cross
2011-02-13  9:40 ` [PATCH 21/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Miscellaneous clock updates Colin Cross

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='AANLkTikFiZ+wVJ5CWG=Lfnexs-YQs29dtyv_1QDuXBYz@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=ccross@android.com \
    --cc=konkers@android.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tegra@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=olof@lixom.net \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH 12/21] ARM: tegra: clock: Add shared bus clock type' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).