From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Sun, 01 Feb 2015 23:19:09 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-ie0-f181.google.com ([209.85.223.181]:44809 "EHLO mail-ie0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by eddie.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S27010831AbbBAWTGzY6ET convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 1 Feb 2015 23:19:06 +0100 Received: by mail-ie0-f181.google.com with SMTP id rd18so4795080iec.12 for ; Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:19:01 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:to:from:in-reply-to:cc:references :message-id:user-agent:subject:date; bh=vJ6BQItj13PmS15WNqlY+77y9M3tMUiKjvIe5r2D2c4=; b=DgRRbITeK42KVncbODOeS1SnSITXnx/WYYHqLTgWruMtpBfgLWrjWOa9vkM12+39Ds cXSCxVNRJNzjRpWO8tPMuyWR0M/HeeXHOF2NuzLVz+B+tjnqKfQZMw4SJ4v8akGCim7H X59ihgI+XI6aiV6zYOFkNrM8+mA1AyGg9vBs63g8JBxeyvE5wixo3MDWjC4NYoiMk2aM 044ziAOAJPYU/SSln1wShuaYctVbdJEv65R1UjASumTE6RtcNlWkAwSkupOvFs32KQDZ PZlQkTlIxktkNxxbthaAOQrDVi1AcISNvAwizwGYd9GiK4EJEhDHU0sbaAmRvcsUm7Tc jLZw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQk1SWjIua9IPpJWBVIndlodboIKTa0Qhid6IxG1DinFotN40uLw9+cbA0COxGmy3diFA/bY X-Received: by 10.42.199.211 with SMTP id et19mr16664093icb.9.1422829140874; Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:19:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (pool-71-119-96-202.lsanca.fios.verizon.net. [71.119.96.202]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id g15sm4995169ioi.22.2015.02.01.14.18.59 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:18:59 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT To: Tomeu Vizoso , "Stephen Boyd" From: Mike Turquette In-Reply-To: Cc: "Geert Uytterhoeven" , "Linux MIPS Mailing List" , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , "Tony Lindgren" , "Chao Xie" , "Haojian Zhuang" , "Boris Brezillon" , "Russell King" , "Jonathan Corbet" , "Emilio L??pez" , "Linux-sh list" , "Alex Elder" , "Zhangfei Gao" , "Bintian Wang" , "Matt Porter" , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Ralf Baechle" , "Tero Kristo" , "Manuel Lauss" , "Maxime Ripard" , "Javier Martinez Canillas" References: <1422011024-32283-1-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <1422011024-32283-5-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <54CA8662.7040008@codeaurora.org> <20150131013158.GA4323@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <20150201221856.421.6151@quantum> User-Agent: alot/0.3.5 Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/6] clk: Add rate constraints to clocks Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:18:56 -0800 Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 45597 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: mturquette@linaro.org Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0 List-Id: linux-mips X-List-ID: linux-mips List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: List-archive: X-list: linux-mips Quoting Tomeu Vizoso (2015-01-31 10:36:22) > On 31 January 2015 at 02:31, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 01/29, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 01/29/15 05:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> > Hi Tomeu, Mike, > >> > > >> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Tomeu Vizoso > >> > wrote: > >> >> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> @@ -2391,25 +2543,24 @@ int __clk_get(struct clk *clk) > >> >> return 1; > >> >> } > >> >> > >> >> -static void clk_core_put(struct clk_core *core) > >> >> +void __clk_put(struct clk *clk) > >> >> { > >> >> struct module *owner; > >> >> > >> >> - owner = core->owner; > >> >> + if (!clk || WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(clk))) > >> >> + return; > >> >> > >> >> clk_prepare_lock(); > >> >> - kref_put(&core->ref, __clk_release); > >> >> + > >> >> + hlist_del(&clk->child_node); > >> >> + clk_core_set_rate_nolock(clk->core, clk->core->req_rate); > >> > At this point, clk->core->req_rate is still zero, causing > >> > cpg_div6_clock_round_rate() to be called with a zero "rate" parameter, > >> > e.g. on r8a7791: > >> > >> Hmm.. I wonder if we should assign core->req_rate to be the same as > >> core->rate during __clk_init()? That would make this call to > >> clk_core_set_rate_nolock() a nop in this case. > >> > > > > Here's a patch to do this > > > > ---8<---- > > From: Stephen Boyd > > Subject: [PATCH] clk: Assign a requested rate by default > > > > We need to assign a requested rate here so that we avoid > > requesting a rate of 0 on clocks when we remove clock consumers. > > Hi, this looks good to me. > > Reviewed-by: Tomeu Vizoso It seems to fix the total boot failure on OMAPs, and hopefully does the same for SH Mobile and others. I've squashed this into Tomeu's rate constraints patch to maintain bisect. Regards, Mike > > Thanks, > > Tomeu > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk.c | 8 +++++--- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > index a29daf9edea4..8416ed1c40be 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > @@ -2142,6 +2142,7 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > struct clk_core *orphan; > > struct hlist_node *tmp2; > > struct clk_core *clk; > > + unsigned long rate; > > > > if (!clk_user) > > return -EINVAL; > > @@ -2266,12 +2267,13 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > * then rate is set to zero. > > */ > > if (clk->ops->recalc_rate) > > - clk->rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > + rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > clk_core_get_rate_nolock(clk->parent)); > > else if (clk->parent) > > - clk->rate = clk->parent->rate; > > + rate = clk->parent->rate; > > else > > - clk->rate = 0; > > + rate = 0; > > + clk->rate = clk->req_rate = rate; > > > > /* > > * walk the list of orphan clocks and reparent any that are children of > > -- > > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Turquette Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/6] clk: Add rate constraints to clocks Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:18:56 -0800 Message-ID: <20150201221856.421.6151@quantum> References: <1422011024-32283-1-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <1422011024-32283-5-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <54CA8662.7040008@codeaurora.org> <20150131013158.GA4323@codeaurora.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-sh-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Tomeu Vizoso , Stephen Boyd Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , Linux MIPS Mailing List , "linux-doc@vger.kernel.org" , Tony Lindgren , Chao Xie , Haojian Zhuang , Boris Brezillon , Russell King , Jonathan Corbet , Emilio L??pez , Linux-sh list , Alex Elder , Zhangfei Gao , Bintian Wang , Matt Porter , "linux-omap@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Ralf Baechle List-Id: linux-omap@vger.kernel.org Quoting Tomeu Vizoso (2015-01-31 10:36:22) > On 31 January 2015 at 02:31, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 01/29, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 01/29/15 05:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> > Hi Tomeu, Mike, > >> > > >> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Tomeu Vizoso > >> > wrote: > >> >> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> @@ -2391,25 +2543,24 @@ int __clk_get(struct clk *clk) > >> >> return 1; > >> >> } > >> >> > >> >> -static void clk_core_put(struct clk_core *core) > >> >> +void __clk_put(struct clk *clk) > >> >> { > >> >> struct module *owner; > >> >> > >> >> - owner = core->owner; > >> >> + if (!clk || WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(clk))) > >> >> + return; > >> >> > >> >> clk_prepare_lock(); > >> >> - kref_put(&core->ref, __clk_release); > >> >> + > >> >> + hlist_del(&clk->child_node); > >> >> + clk_core_set_rate_nolock(clk->core, clk->core->req_rate); > >> > At this point, clk->core->req_rate is still zero, causing > >> > cpg_div6_clock_round_rate() to be called with a zero "rate" parameter, > >> > e.g. on r8a7791: > >> > >> Hmm.. I wonder if we should assign core->req_rate to be the same as > >> core->rate during __clk_init()? That would make this call to > >> clk_core_set_rate_nolock() a nop in this case. > >> > > > > Here's a patch to do this > > > > ---8<---- > > From: Stephen Boyd > > Subject: [PATCH] clk: Assign a requested rate by default > > > > We need to assign a requested rate here so that we avoid > > requesting a rate of 0 on clocks when we remove clock consumers. > > Hi, this looks good to me. > > Reviewed-by: Tomeu Vizoso It seems to fix the total boot failure on OMAPs, and hopefully does the same for SH Mobile and others. I've squashed this into Tomeu's rate constraints patch to maintain bisect. Regards, Mike > > Thanks, > > Tomeu > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk.c | 8 +++++--- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > index a29daf9edea4..8416ed1c40be 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > @@ -2142,6 +2142,7 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > struct clk_core *orphan; > > struct hlist_node *tmp2; > > struct clk_core *clk; > > + unsigned long rate; > > > > if (!clk_user) > > return -EINVAL; > > @@ -2266,12 +2267,13 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > * then rate is set to zero. > > */ > > if (clk->ops->recalc_rate) > > - clk->rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > + rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > clk_core_get_rate_nolock(clk->parent)); > > else if (clk->parent) > > - clk->rate = clk->parent->rate; > > + rate = clk->parent->rate; > > else > > - clk->rate = 0; > > + rate = 0; > > + clk->rate = clk->req_rate = rate; > > > > /* > > * walk the list of orphan clocks and reparent any that are children of > > -- > > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Turquette Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 22:18:56 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH v13 4/6] clk: Add rate constraints to clocks Message-Id: <20150201221856.421.6151@quantum> List-Id: References: <1422011024-32283-1-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <1422011024-32283-5-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <54CA8662.7040008@codeaurora.org> <20150131013158.GA4323@codeaurora.org> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Quoting Tomeu Vizoso (2015-01-31 10:36:22) > On 31 January 2015 at 02:31, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 01/29, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 01/29/15 05:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> > Hi Tomeu, Mike, > >> > > >> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Tomeu Vizoso > >> > wrote: > >> >> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> @@ -2391,25 +2543,24 @@ int __clk_get(struct clk *clk) > >> >> return 1; > >> >> } > >> >> > >> >> -static void clk_core_put(struct clk_core *core) > >> >> +void __clk_put(struct clk *clk) > >> >> { > >> >> struct module *owner; > >> >> > >> >> - owner = core->owner; > >> >> + if (!clk || WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(clk))) > >> >> + return; > >> >> > >> >> clk_prepare_lock(); > >> >> - kref_put(&core->ref, __clk_release); > >> >> + > >> >> + hlist_del(&clk->child_node); > >> >> + clk_core_set_rate_nolock(clk->core, clk->core->req_rate); > >> > At this point, clk->core->req_rate is still zero, causing > >> > cpg_div6_clock_round_rate() to be called with a zero "rate" parameter, > >> > e.g. on r8a7791: > >> > >> Hmm.. I wonder if we should assign core->req_rate to be the same as > >> core->rate during __clk_init()? That would make this call to > >> clk_core_set_rate_nolock() a nop in this case. > >> > > > > Here's a patch to do this > > > > ---8<---- > > From: Stephen Boyd > > Subject: [PATCH] clk: Assign a requested rate by default > > > > We need to assign a requested rate here so that we avoid > > requesting a rate of 0 on clocks when we remove clock consumers. > > Hi, this looks good to me. > > Reviewed-by: Tomeu Vizoso It seems to fix the total boot failure on OMAPs, and hopefully does the same for SH Mobile and others. I've squashed this into Tomeu's rate constraints patch to maintain bisect. Regards, Mike > > Thanks, > > Tomeu > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk.c | 8 +++++--- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > index a29daf9edea4..8416ed1c40be 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > @@ -2142,6 +2142,7 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > struct clk_core *orphan; > > struct hlist_node *tmp2; > > struct clk_core *clk; > > + unsigned long rate; > > > > if (!clk_user) > > return -EINVAL; > > @@ -2266,12 +2267,13 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > * then rate is set to zero. > > */ > > if (clk->ops->recalc_rate) > > - clk->rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > + rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > clk_core_get_rate_nolock(clk->parent)); > > else if (clk->parent) > > - clk->rate = clk->parent->rate; > > + rate = clk->parent->rate; > > else > > - clk->rate = 0; > > + rate = 0; > > + clk->rate = clk->req_rate = rate; > > > > /* > > * walk the list of orphan clocks and reparent any that are children of > > -- > > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mturquette@linaro.org (Mike Turquette) Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:18:56 -0800 Subject: [PATCH v13 4/6] clk: Add rate constraints to clocks In-Reply-To: References: <1422011024-32283-1-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <1422011024-32283-5-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com> <54CA8662.7040008@codeaurora.org> <20150131013158.GA4323@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <20150201221856.421.6151@quantum> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org Quoting Tomeu Vizoso (2015-01-31 10:36:22) > On 31 January 2015 at 02:31, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > On 01/29, Stephen Boyd wrote: > >> On 01/29/15 05:31, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > >> > Hi Tomeu, Mike, > >> > > >> > On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 12:03 PM, Tomeu Vizoso > >> > wrote: > >> >> --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > >> >> @@ -2391,25 +2543,24 @@ int __clk_get(struct clk *clk) > >> >> return 1; > >> >> } > >> >> > >> >> -static void clk_core_put(struct clk_core *core) > >> >> +void __clk_put(struct clk *clk) > >> >> { > >> >> struct module *owner; > >> >> > >> >> - owner = core->owner; > >> >> + if (!clk || WARN_ON_ONCE(IS_ERR(clk))) > >> >> + return; > >> >> > >> >> clk_prepare_lock(); > >> >> - kref_put(&core->ref, __clk_release); > >> >> + > >> >> + hlist_del(&clk->child_node); > >> >> + clk_core_set_rate_nolock(clk->core, clk->core->req_rate); > >> > At this point, clk->core->req_rate is still zero, causing > >> > cpg_div6_clock_round_rate() to be called with a zero "rate" parameter, > >> > e.g. on r8a7791: > >> > >> Hmm.. I wonder if we should assign core->req_rate to be the same as > >> core->rate during __clk_init()? That would make this call to > >> clk_core_set_rate_nolock() a nop in this case. > >> > > > > Here's a patch to do this > > > > ---8<---- > > From: Stephen Boyd > > Subject: [PATCH] clk: Assign a requested rate by default > > > > We need to assign a requested rate here so that we avoid > > requesting a rate of 0 on clocks when we remove clock consumers. > > Hi, this looks good to me. > > Reviewed-by: Tomeu Vizoso It seems to fix the total boot failure on OMAPs, and hopefully does the same for SH Mobile and others. I've squashed this into Tomeu's rate constraints patch to maintain bisect. Regards, Mike > > Thanks, > > Tomeu > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd > > --- > > drivers/clk/clk.c | 8 +++++--- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > index a29daf9edea4..8416ed1c40be 100644 > > --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c > > +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c > > @@ -2142,6 +2142,7 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > struct clk_core *orphan; > > struct hlist_node *tmp2; > > struct clk_core *clk; > > + unsigned long rate; > > > > if (!clk_user) > > return -EINVAL; > > @@ -2266,12 +2267,13 @@ int __clk_init(struct device *dev, struct clk *clk_user) > > * then rate is set to zero. > > */ > > if (clk->ops->recalc_rate) > > - clk->rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > + rate = clk->ops->recalc_rate(clk->hw, > > clk_core_get_rate_nolock(clk->parent)); > > else if (clk->parent) > > - clk->rate = clk->parent->rate; > > + rate = clk->parent->rate; > > else > > - clk->rate = 0; > > + rate = 0; > > + clk->rate = clk->req_rate = rate; > > > > /* > > * walk the list of orphan clocks and reparent any that are children of > > -- > > Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, > > a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project > > > > _______________________________________________ > > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > > linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org > > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel