From: boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com (Boris Brezillon)
To: linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 00/10] clk: implement clock rate protection mechanism
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 14:47:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170620144726.5c2f3213@bbrezillon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1497961950.7387.7.camel@baylibre.com>
+Quentin
On Tue, 20 Jun 2017 14:32:30 +0200
Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-06-20 at 13:54 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@baylibre.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2017-06-20 at 11:07 +0200, Linus Walleij wrote:
> > > When the rate is critical to perform a particular task. My example is the
> > > audio
> > > and i2s output. You can't tolerate glitches during the playback, the end
> > > user
> > > would complain (longer description in the original RFC)
> >
> > I see. Thanks for your detailed explanation!
> >
> > > It also fixes the behavior of CLK_SET_RATE_GATE flag, which is why I put you
> > > in
> > > CC.
> > >
> > > ux500 uses this flag several time, I'd like make sure people are not relying
> > > on
> > > its broken implementation.
> >
> > Ux500 audio is broken, but I'm fixing it a little at a time...
>
> No problem with Ux500 audio, don't worry :)
> Audio is just one application among others.
>
> The concern regarding ux500 is that the clock controller declares clocks using
> the CLK_SET_RATE_GATE flag (like qcom, at91 and several other)
>
> here is the definition:
> #define CLK_SET_RATE_GATE BIT(0) /* must be gated across rate change */
>
> My interpretation it that, as long as clock is enabled, rate can't change.
>
> The implementation of this flag is currently broken:
> * If you call set_rate on directly on the clock while it is enabled, you will
> get -EBUSY, as expected
> * If you call set_rate on its parent, rate will change, changing the rate of the
> child clock as well ...
>
> With this patchset applied, calling set_rate on the parent would also return
> -EBUSY, enforcing the "rate can't change while enabled" property.
>
> To build confidence that this won't be causing regression, I'd like to check
> that platform using this flag are no relying on the broken behavior.
>
> I've included the clock maintainers of at91, qcom, and ux500 (you) in this
> thread because they are the heaviest users of this flag, so the more likely to
> report a problem.
This flag in at91 clk drivers really means that rate cannot be changed
while the clk is enabled. We have other clock where this is not a
problem (at least, nothing in mentioned in the datasheet).
>
> If you could apply this series and just do things as usual, It'd be awesome !
Actually, this is a feature I was pushing for a while back [1],
because I had the same problem (one user messing up with a PLL while
others were relying on its rate). I'm glad someone finally had time to
provide a solution for this problem.
Quentin tested the series, and I guess he'll soon add his Tested-by.
Note that this series does not address all problems. For example, when
several drivers are setting a rate on different clks that take the
same parent, the first one to set the rate and enable the clk wins.
He has an hack-ish solution for our audio-pll case preventing non audio
users to mess up with the audio PLL. It'd be great to have a generic
solution, though I don't know how this can be solved without advanced
description of the clk-rate setting policy.
[1]https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/6204221/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-20 12:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-12 19:44 [PATCH v3 00/10] clk: implement clock rate protection mechanism Jerome Brunet
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 01/10] clk: take the prepare lock out of clk_core_set_parent Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 1:21 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 02/10] clk: add clk_core_set_phase_nolock function Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 1:22 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 03/10] clk: rework calls to round and determine rate callbacks Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 1:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 04/10] clk: use round rate to bail out early in set_rate Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 2:00 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-07-26 17:13 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-08-04 0:32 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 05/10] clk: add support for clock protection Jerome Brunet
2017-07-26 0:12 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-07-26 17:18 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-08-04 0:18 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-08-08 22:37 ` Michael Turquette
2017-08-09 2:19 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-08-09 11:45 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-08-09 13:34 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-08-09 13:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2017-08-09 13:45 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-08-10 16:48 ` Michael Turquette
2017-08-10 16:46 ` Michael Turquette
2017-08-09 13:07 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-08-09 12:18 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-08-10 16:54 ` Michael Turquette
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 06/10] clk: add clk_set_rate_protect Jerome Brunet
2017-07-26 0:59 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 07/10] clk: rollback set_rate_range changes on failure Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 2:02 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-07-26 17:22 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 08/10] clk: cosmetic changes to clk_summary debugfs entry Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 2:02 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 09/10] clk: fix incorrect usage of ENOSYS Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 2:03 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-06-12 19:44 ` [PATCH v3 10/10] clk: fix CLK_SET_RATE_GATE with clock rate protection Jerome Brunet
2017-06-20 9:07 ` [PATCH v3 00/10] clk: implement clock rate protection mechanism Linus Walleij
2017-06-20 10:50 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-06-20 11:54 ` Linus Walleij
2017-06-20 12:32 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-06-20 12:47 ` Boris Brezillon [this message]
2017-06-22 7:07 ` Quentin Schulz
2017-06-22 10:09 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-06-20 15:29 ` Linus Walleij
2017-06-21 13:15 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-07-12 1:16 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-07-26 17:05 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-07-27 22:44 ` Stephen Boyd
2017-08-08 22:40 ` Michael Turquette
2017-08-09 12:14 ` Jerome Brunet
2017-07-11 21:04 ` 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=20170620144726.5c2f3213@bbrezillon \
--to=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=linus-amlogic@lists.infradead.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 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).