All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Masney <bmasney@redhat.com>
To: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
Cc: Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>,
	Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: fix self-consuming provider module pinning
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 08:32:55 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <amC4d_RMA5oRR-ap@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1j4ihrea5u.fsf@starbuckisacylon.baylibre.com>

Hi Jerome,

On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 09:49:33AM +0200, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> On mar. 21 juil. 2026 at 18:48, Brian Masney <bmasney@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 12:08:17PM +0200, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> >> clk_hw_get_clk() lets a provider get a struct clk for one of its own
> >> struct clk_hw.
> >> 
> >> When a struct clk is created, the module usage count of the provider
> >> is unconditionally increased. For a self-consuming provider, this means
> >> it pins itself and the module can never be unloaded.
> >> 
> >> Increasing the module usage count should only be done when the consumer
> >> lives in a different module from the provider. Use THIS_MODULE to
> >> capture caller's module and increase the module usage count accordingly.
> >> 
> >> It is OK for consumer-only APIs such as clk_get() or of_clk_get() to
> >> pass a NULL owner. As a result, any provider module will get pinned,
> >> same as before.
> >> 
> >> Fixes: 30d6f8c15d2c ("clk: add api to get clk consumer from clk_hw")
> >> Signed-off-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com>
> >> ---
> >> This issue has been present for a while. Virtually all users of
> >> clk_hw_get_clk() are affected. The majority are compiled as builtins
> >> according to the defconfigs. It is not problem in this case but it is
> >> if the configuration is changed to module.
> >> 
> >> The following modules are using clk_hw_get_clk() and are compiled as
> >> module with some shipped defconfigs:
> >> * drivers/gpu/drm/msm/disp/mdp4/mdp4_lvds_pll.c
> >> * drivers/phy/cadence/phy-cadence-sierra.c
> >> * drivers/pwm/pwm-meson.c
> >> * sound/soc/codecs/lpass-va-macro.c
> >> 
> >> Currently those module cannot be unloaded once they have been loaded.
> >> 
> >> """
> >> rmmod: ERROR: Module blabla-module is in use
> >> """
> >> 
> >> I initially thought about using the dev parameter and compare it
> >> against the clock own device but this proved unreliable. A clock
> >> does not always have a backing device and some paths, such as
> >> clk_get_sys(), do not provide a device either.
> >> 
> >> With this applied, we can get back to removing the direct usage
> >> of the struct clk in struct clk_hw and eventually remove this
> >> struct member entirely.
> >
> > __clk_register() has this comment:
> >
> >         /*
> >          * Don't call clk_hw_create_clk() here because that would pin the
> >          * provider module to itself and prevent it from ever being removed.
> >          */
> >         hw->clk = alloc_clk(core, NULL, NULL);
> >
> > With your change, can this code path be updated to use clk_hw_create_clk() ?
> >
> 
> Indeed the comment no longer applies but I think keeping alloc
> here is best. It avoids "linking a consumer" here where there should not
> be one. All clocks would appear to have consumer in the clk summary, it
> would weird. 
> 
> The end goal is remove the hw->clk. I've restarted the work to rid the
> kernel of using this. Some rework don't need clk_hw_create_clk() and are
> not blocked by this patch but most will.
> 
> Once this is done, we could probably merge clk_hw_create_clk() and
> alloc(), the split won't have purpose anymore.

That all sounds good.

I know that Stephen likes to see any changes that are made to clk.c have
associated kunit tests to avoid any breakage in the clk core. There's
already a bunch of tests in clk_test.c.

Brian



  reply	other threads:[~2026-07-22 12:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-21 10:08 [PATCH] clk: fix self-consuming provider module pinning Jerome Brunet
2026-07-21 22:48 ` Brian Masney
2026-07-22  7:49   ` Jerome Brunet
2026-07-22 12:32     ` Brian Masney [this message]
2026-07-22 12:41       ` Jerome Brunet

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=amC4d_RMA5oRR-ap@redhat.com \
    --to=bmasney@redhat.com \
    --cc=jbrunet@baylibre.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=mturquette@baylibre.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.