All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Turquette <mturquette@linaro.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
	"Stephen Boyd" <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Add tracepoints for hardware operations
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2015 11:05:05 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150202190505.421.23196@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150202110033.6462d4f4@gandalf.local.home>

Quoting Steven Rostedt (2015-02-02 08:00:33)
> On Fri, 30 Jan 2015 16:16:11 -0800
> Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> 
> > It's useful to have tracepoints around operations that change the
> > hardware state so that we can debug clock hardware performance
> > and operations. Four basic types of events are supported: on/off
> > events for enable, disable, prepare, unprepare that only record
> > an event and a clock name, rate changing events for
> > clk_set_{min_,max_}rate{_range}(), phase changing events for
> > clk_set_phase() and parent changing events for clk_set_parent().
> > 
> > Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
> 
> I don't see anything wrong with the implementation of the tracepoints.
> Now whether or not they are useful is up to the clk maintainer to
> decide.

Steven,

Thanks for the review. Stephen Boyd is now co-maintaining the framework
by the way.

Regards,
Mike

> 
> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/clk/clk.c          |  32 ++++++++
> >  include/trace/events/clk.h | 198 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 230 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 include/trace/events/clk.h
> > 
> 
> 
>   
> >  unlock_out:
> > @@ -861,9 +868,12 @@ static void clk_core_unprepare(struct clk_core *clk)
> >  
> >       WARN_ON(clk->enable_count > 0);
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_unprepare(clk);
> > +
> >       if (clk->ops->unprepare)
> >               clk->ops->unprepare(clk->hw);
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_unprepare_complete(clk);
> >       clk_core_unprepare(clk->parent);
> 
> I guess you do not care about the clk_core_unprepare time.
> 
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -901,6 +911,8 @@ static int clk_core_prepare(struct clk_core *clk)
> >               if (ret)
> >                       return ret;
> >  
> > +             trace_clk_prepare(clk);
> > +
> >               if (clk->ops->prepare) {
> >                       ret = clk->ops->prepare(clk->hw);
> >                       if (ret) {
> > @@ -908,6 +920,8 @@ static int clk_core_prepare(struct clk_core *clk)
> >                               return ret;
> >                       }
> >               }
> > +
> > +             trace_clk_prepare_complete(clk);
> 
> I'm curious to why you do not put the tracepoint within the if
> statement, and only show the tracepoints if the clock prepare is
> actually called. Also, if you exit out with that return, will you tools
> be OK with seeing the clk_prepare but not the clk_prepare_complete?
> 
> 
> >       }
> >  
> >       clk->prepare_count++;
> > @@ -953,9 +967,13 @@ static void clk_core_disable(struct clk_core *clk)
> >       if (--clk->enable_count > 0)
> >               return;
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_disable(clk);
> > +
> >       if (clk->ops->disable)
> >               clk->ops->disable(clk->hw);
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_disable_complete(clk);
> > +
> >       clk_core_disable(clk->parent);
> >  }
> >  
> > @@ -1008,6 +1026,7 @@ static int clk_core_enable(struct clk_core *clk)
> >               if (ret)
> >                       return ret;
> >  
> > +             trace_clk_enable(clk);
> >               if (clk->ops->enable) {
> >                       ret = clk->ops->enable(clk->hw);
> >                       if (ret) {
> > @@ -1015,6 +1034,7 @@ static int clk_core_enable(struct clk_core *clk)
> >                               return ret;
> >                       }
> >               }
> > +             trace_clk_enable_complete(clk);
> 
> Same here.
> 
> -- Steve
> 
> >       }
> >  
> >       clk->enable_count++;
> > @@ -1383,6 +1403,8 @@ static struct clk_core *__clk_set_parent_before(struct clk_core *clk,
> >       unsigned long flags;
> >       struct clk_core *old_parent = clk->parent;
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_set_parent(clk, parent);
> > +
> >       /*
> >        * Migrate prepare state between parents and prevent race with
> >        * clk_enable().
> > @@ -1427,6 +1449,8 @@ static void __clk_set_parent_after(struct clk_core *core,
> >               clk_core_disable(old_parent);
> >               clk_core_unprepare(old_parent);
> >       }
> > +
> > +     trace_clk_set_parent_complete(core, parent);
> >  }
> >  
> >  static int __clk_set_parent(struct clk_core *clk, struct clk_core *parent,
> > @@ -1663,6 +1687,8 @@ static void clk_change_rate(struct clk_core *clk)
> >       else if (clk->parent)
> >               best_parent_rate = clk->parent->rate;
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_set_rate(clk, clk->new_rate);
> > +
> >       if (clk->new_parent && clk->new_parent != clk->parent) {
> >               old_parent = __clk_set_parent_before(clk, clk->new_parent);
> >  
> > @@ -1681,6 +1707,8 @@ static void clk_change_rate(struct clk_core *clk)
> >       if (!skip_set_rate && clk->ops->set_rate)
> >               clk->ops->set_rate(clk->hw, clk->new_rate, best_parent_rate);
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_set_rate_complete(clk, clk->new_rate);
> > +
> >       clk->rate = clk_recalc(clk, best_parent_rate);
> >  
> >       if (clk->notifier_count && old_rate != clk->rate)
> > @@ -2081,6 +2109,8 @@ int clk_set_phase(struct clk *clk, int degrees)
> >  
> >       clk_prepare_lock();
> >  
> > +     trace_clk_set_phase(clk->core, degrees);
> > +
> >       if (!clk->core->ops->set_phase)
> >               goto out_unlock;
> >  
> > @@ -2090,6 +2120,8 @@ int clk_set_phase(struct clk *clk, int degrees)
> >               clk->core->phase = degrees;
> >  
> >  out_unlock:
> > +     trace_clk_set_phase_complete(clk->core, degrees);
> > +
> >       clk_prepare_unlock();
> >  
> >  out:
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2015-02-02 19:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-01-31  0:16 [PATCH] clk: Add tracepoints for hardware operations Stephen Boyd
2015-02-02 16:00 ` Steven Rostedt
2015-02-02 19:05   ` Mike Turquette [this message]
2015-02-02 19:41   ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-02 20:00     ` Steven Rostedt
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-06-30 23:56 Stephen Boyd
2014-06-30 23:56 ` Stephen Boyd
2014-07-01  0:52 ` Steven Rostedt
2014-07-01  0:52   ` Steven Rostedt
2014-07-01  1:07   ` Stephen Boyd
2014-07-01  1:07     ` Stephen Boyd
2014-07-01  1:11     ` Steven Rostedt
2014-07-01  1:11       ` Steven Rostedt
2014-07-02  3:44     ` Mike Turquette
2014-07-02  3:44       ` Mike Turquette

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=20150202190505.421.23196@quantum \
    --to=mturquette@linaro.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
    --cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
    /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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.