All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Masney <bmasney@redhat.com>
To: Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
	Biju Das <biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com>,
	Fabrizio Castro <fabrizio.castro.jz@renesas.com>,
	Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] clk: divider: Add KUnit tests for clk_divider_bestdiv() ULONG_MAX handling
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 15:35:21 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aevF-aA0FMp00wHW@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260421182529.3055114-2-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>

Hi Lad,

On Tue, Apr 21, 2026 at 07:25:25PM +0100, Prabhakar wrote:
> From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
> 
> Add KUnit tests to verify the behaviour of clk_divider_bestdiv() when
> clk_round_rate() is called with ULONG_MAX, which is the canonical way
> to probe the maximum rate a clock can produce.
> 
> Two test cases are introduced:
> 
> - clk_divider_bestdiv_ulong_max_returns_max_rate: registers a 1 GHz
>   fixed-rate parent driving a table-based divider whose smallest entry
>   is div=2 (entries: 2, 4, 8). Calls clk_hw_round_rate(div_hw, ULONG_MAX)
>   and checks the result.
> 
> - clk_divider_bestdiv_mux_ulong_max_returns_max_rate: places a two-input
>   mux (4 GHz and 2 GHz fixed-rate parents, CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT) ahead of
>   the same table-based divider to verify correct parent selection under
>   ULONG_MAX.
> 
> Both tests use an explicit clk_div_table with a minimum divider of 2 so
> that the pre-loop maxdiv clamping in clk_divider_bestdiv():
> 
>     maxdiv = min(ULONG_MAX / rate, maxdiv);
> 
> clamps maxdiv to 1, causing _next_div() to return 2 on the first
> iteration and skip the loop body entirely. This makes bestdiv fall back
> to the maximum divider, returning the minimum rate rather than the
> maximum.
> 
> The expected values intentionally reflect the buggy output:
>   - test 1: PARENT_RATE_1GHZ / 8  (minimum rate, not maximum)
>   - test 2: 0                      (invalid, loop never populated bestdiv)
> 
> These will be corrected to PARENT_RATE_1GHZ / 2 and PARENT_RATE_4GHZ / 2
> respectively once the fix to clk_divider_bestdiv() is applied.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com>
> ---
> v2->v3:
> - Added false positive expected values
> - Updated the commit message
> - Added dependency on !S390 in Kconfig
> ---
>  drivers/clk/Kconfig            |   8 ++
>  drivers/clk/Makefile           |   1 +
>  drivers/clk/clk-divider_test.c | 158 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 167 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 drivers/clk/clk-divider_test.c

CONFIG_CLK_DIVIDER_KUNIT_TEST=y needs to be added to
drivers/clk/.kunitconfig.

> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/Kconfig b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> index b2efbe9f6acb..fdeb87ff8fd9 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/clk/Kconfig
> @@ -573,4 +573,12 @@ config CLK_FD_KUNIT_TEST
>  	help
>  	  Kunit test for the clk-fractional-divider type.
>  
> +config CLK_DIVIDER_KUNIT_TEST
> +	tristate "KUnit tests for clk divider bestdiv" if !KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> +	depends on KUNIT
> +	depends on !S390
> +	default KUNIT_ALL_TESTS
> +	help
> +	  Kunit test for the clk-divider type.
> +
>  endif
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/Makefile b/drivers/clk/Makefile
> index a3e2862ebd7e..dc653b458f56 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/clk/Makefile
> @@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ clk-test-y			:= clk_test.o \
>  				   kunit_clk_hw_get_dev_of_node.dtbo.o \
>  				   kunit_clk_parent_data_test.dtbo.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-divider.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_DIVIDER_KUNIT_TEST) += clk-divider_test.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-fixed-factor.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_COMMON_CLK)	+= clk-fixed-rate.o
>  obj-$(CONFIG_CLK_FIXED_RATE_KUNIT_TEST)	+= clk-fixed-rate-test.o
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk-divider_test.c b/drivers/clk/clk-divider_test.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..3087c77fb157
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/clk/clk-divider_test.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * KUnit tests for clk_divider_bestdiv()
> + */
> +#include <kunit/test.h>
> +#include <linux/clk.h>
> +#include <linux/clk-provider.h>
> +#include <linux/limits.h>
> +#include <linux/units.h>
> +
> +#define PARENT_RATE_1GHZ	GIGA
> +#define PARENT_RATE_2GHZ	(2 * GIGA)
> +#define PARENT_RATE_4GHZ	(4 * GIGA)
> +
> +static const struct clk_div_table bestdiv_table[] = {
> +	{ .val = 0, .div = 2 },
> +	{ .val = 1, .div = 4 },
> +	{ .val = 2, .div = 8 },
> +	{ /* sentinel */ }
> +};

Is it possible to drop the table like I suggested in v2? You can use
CLK_DIVIDER_ONE_BASED. (See docs in include/linux/clk-provider.h).
You can also use CLK_DIVIDER_POWER_OF_TWO if you want the divider to be
larger.

> +
> +static void unregister_fixed_rate(void *hw)
> +{
> +	clk_hw_unregister_fixed_rate(hw);
> +}
> +
> +static void unregister_divider(void *hw)
> +{
> +	clk_hw_unregister_divider(hw);
> +}
> +
> +static void unregister_mux(void *hw)
> +{
> +	clk_hw_unregister_mux(hw);
> +}

Can these 3 wrapper functions be dropped, and you just call the inner
function in the call to kunit_add_action_or_reset()? For example,
instead of:

    static void unregister_fixed_rate(void *hw)
    {
        clk_hw_unregister_fixed_rate(hw);
    }
    ...
    KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
                    kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, unregister_fixed_rate,
                                              parent_hw));

You should be able to do this:

    KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
                    kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, clk_hw_unregister_fixed_rate,
                                              parent_hw));

I think we should just drop the wrappers completely if they aren't
needed. If more functionality is needed in the future, then the wrappers
can be added then.

> +
> +/*
> + * Test that clk_round_rate(clk, ULONG_MAX) returns the maximum achievable
> + * rate for a divider clock.
> + */
> +static void clk_divider_bestdiv_ulong_max_returns_max_rate(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +	struct clk_hw *parent_hw, *div_hw;
> +	u32 *fake_reg;
> +	unsigned long rate;

Reverse Christmas tree order.

> +
> +	fake_reg = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*fake_reg), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, fake_reg);
> +
> +	parent_hw = clk_hw_register_fixed_rate(NULL, "bestdiv-parent",
> +					       NULL, 0, PARENT_RATE_1GHZ);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, parent_hw);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
> +			kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, unregister_fixed_rate,
> +						  parent_hw));
> +
> +	div_hw = clk_hw_register_divider_table(NULL, "bestdiv-div",
> +					       "bestdiv-parent",
> +					       CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> +					       (void __iomem __force *)fake_reg,
> +					       0, 2, 0, bestdiv_table, NULL);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, div_hw);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
> +			kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, unregister_divider, div_hw));
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * ULONG_MAX is the canonical way to probe the maximum rate a clock
> +	 * can produce.
> +	 */
> +	rate = clk_hw_round_rate(div_hw, ULONG_MAX);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, PARENT_RATE_1GHZ / 8);
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Test that clk_round_rate(clk, ULONG_MAX) returns the correct maximum rate
> + * when a mux clock sits between a divider and its parent candidates.
> + *
> + * Topology:
> + *
> + *   [fixed 4 GHz] --\
> + *                    +--> [mux CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT] --> [div {2,4,8} CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT]
> + *   [fixed 2 GHz] --/
> + *
> + */
> +static void clk_divider_bestdiv_mux_ulong_max_returns_max_rate(struct kunit *test)
> +{
> +	static const char * const mux_parents[] = {
> +		"bestdiv-mux-parent-a",
> +		"bestdiv-mux-parent-b",
> +	};
> +	struct clk_hw *parent_a_hw, *parent_b_hw, *mux_hw, *div_hw;
> +	u32 *fake_reg_mux, *fake_reg_div;
> +	unsigned long rate;
> +
> +	fake_reg_mux = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*fake_reg_mux), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, fake_reg_mux);
> +
> +	fake_reg_div = kunit_kzalloc(test, sizeof(*fake_reg_div), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, fake_reg_div);
> +
> +	/* Higher-rate parent: the mux should select this for ULONG_MAX. */
> +	parent_a_hw = clk_hw_register_fixed_rate(NULL, "bestdiv-mux-parent-a",
> +						 NULL, 0, PARENT_RATE_4GHZ);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, parent_a_hw);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
> +			kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, unregister_fixed_rate,
> +						  parent_a_hw));
> +
> +	/* Lower-rate parent: should not be selected. */
> +	parent_b_hw = clk_hw_register_fixed_rate(NULL, "bestdiv-mux-parent-b",
> +						 NULL, 0, PARENT_RATE_2GHZ);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, parent_b_hw);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
> +			kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, unregister_fixed_rate,
> +						  parent_b_hw));
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * 1-bit mux register selects between the two parents.
> +	 * CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT allows the divider's rate request to
> +	 * propagate into clk_mux_determine_rate().
> +	 */
> +	mux_hw = clk_hw_register_mux(NULL, "bestdiv-mux",
> +				     mux_parents, ARRAY_SIZE(mux_parents),
> +				     CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> +				     (void __iomem __force *)fake_reg_mux,
> +				     0, 1, 0, NULL);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, mux_hw);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
> +			kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, unregister_mux, mux_hw));
> +
> +	div_hw = clk_hw_register_divider_table(NULL, "bestdiv-mux-div",
> +					       "bestdiv-mux",
> +					       CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> +					       (void __iomem __force *)fake_reg_div,
> +					       0, 2, 0, bestdiv_table, NULL);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_NOT_ERR_OR_NULL(test, div_hw);
> +	KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, 0,
> +			kunit_add_action_or_reset(test, unregister_divider, div_hw));
> +
> +	rate = clk_hw_round_rate(div_hw, ULONG_MAX);
> +	KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ(test, rate, 0);
> +}
> +
> +static struct kunit_case clk_divider_bestdiv_test_cases[] = {
> +	KUNIT_CASE(clk_divider_bestdiv_ulong_max_returns_max_rate),
> +	KUNIT_CASE(clk_divider_bestdiv_mux_ulong_max_returns_max_rate),
> +	{}
> +};
> +
> +static struct kunit_suite clk_divider_bestdiv_test_suite = {
> +	.name = "clk_divider_bestdiv",
> +	.test_cases = clk_divider_bestdiv_test_cases,
> +};
> +
> +kunit_test_suite(clk_divider_bestdiv_test_suite);
> +
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("KUnit tests for clk_divider_bestdiv()");

KUnit tests for clk divider.

I have another tests that will eventually be added to this file.

Brian


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-24 19:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-21 18:25 [PATCH v3 0/2] Fix clk_divider_bestdiv() to get max clk rate supported and add some kunit test suites Prabhakar
2026-04-21 18:25 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] clk: divider: Add KUnit tests for clk_divider_bestdiv() ULONG_MAX handling Prabhakar
2026-04-24 19:35   ` Brian Masney [this message]
2026-04-25 21:19     ` Lad, Prabhakar
2026-04-21 18:25 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] clk: divider: Fix clk_divider_bestdiv() returning min rate for large rate requests Prabhakar

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=aevF-aA0FMp00wHW@redhat.com \
    --to=bmasney@redhat.com \
    --cc=biju.das.jz@bp.renesas.com \
    --cc=fabrizio.castro.jz@renesas.com \
    --cc=geert+renesas@glider.be \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
    --cc=prabhakar.csengg@gmail.com \
    --cc=prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com \
    --cc=sboyd@kernel.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.