From: mturquette@linaro.org (Mike Turquette)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v13 3/6] clk: Make clk API return per-user struct clk instances
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 18:18:00 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150225021800.421.95142@quantum> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150224140808.GG8670@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
Quoting Russell King - ARM Linux (2015-02-24 06:08:08)
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 01:32:33PM -0800, Mike Turquette wrote:
> > Quoting Stephen Boyd (2015-02-06 11:30:18)
> > > On 02/06/15 05:39, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 05:35:28PM -0800, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> From what I can tell this code is
> > > >> now broken because we made all clk getting functions (there's quite a
> > > >> few...) return unique pointers every time they're called. It seems that
> > > >> the driver wants to know if extclk and clk are the same so it can do
> > > >> something differently in kirkwood_set_rate(). Do we need some sort of
> > > >> clk_equal(struct clk *a, struct clk *b) function for drivers like this?
> > > > Well, the clocks in question are the SoC internal clock (which is more or
> > > > less fixed, but has a programmable divider) and an externally supplied
> > > > clock, and the IP has a multiplexer on its input which allows us to select
> > > > between those two sources.
> > > >
> > > > If it were possible to bind both to the same clock, it wouldn't be a
> > > > useful configuration - nothing would be gained from doing so in terms of
> > > > available rates.
> > > >
> > > > What the comparison is there for is to catch the case with legacy lookups
> > > > where a clkdev lookup entry with a NULL connection ID results in matching
> > > > any connection ID passed to clk_get(). If the patch changes this, then
> > > > we will have a regression - and this is something which needs fixing
> > > > _before_ we do this "return unique clocks".
> > > >
> > >
> > > Ok. It seems that we might need a clk_equal() or similar API after all.
> > > My understanding is that this driver is calling clk_get() twice with
> > > NULL for the con_id and then "extclk" in attempts to get the SoC
> > > internal clock and the externally supplied clock. If we're using legacy
> > > lookups then both clk_get() calls may map to the same clk_lookup entry
> > > and before Tomeu's patch that returns unique clocks the driver could
> > > detect this case and know that there isn't an external clock. Looking at
> > > arch/arm/mach-dove/common.c it seems that there is only one lookup per
> > > device and it has a wildcard NULL for con_id so both clk_get() calls
> > > here are going to find the same lookup and get a unique struct clk pointer.
> > >
> > > Why don't we make the legacy lookup more specific and actually indicate
> > > "internal" for the con_id? Then the external clock would fail to be
> > > found, but we can detect that case and figure out that it's not due to
> > > probe defer, but instead due to the fact that there really isn't any
> > > mapping. It looks like the code is already prepared for this anyway.
> > >
> > > ----8<----
> > >
> > > From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
> > > Subject: [PATCH] ARM: dove: Remove wildcard from mvebu-audio device clk lookup
> > >
> > > This i2s driver is using the wildcard nature of clkdev lookups to
> > > figure out if there's an external clock or not. It does this by
> > > calling clk_get() twice with NULL for the con_id first and then
> > > "external" for the con_id the second time around and then
> > > compares the two pointers. With DT the wildcard feature of
> > > clk_get() is gone and so the driver has to handle an error from
> > > the second clk_get() call as meaning "no external clock
> > > specified". Let's use that logic even with clk lookups to
> > > simplify the code and remove the struct clk pointer comparisons
> > > which may not work in the future when clk_get() returns unique
> > > pointers.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>
> >
> > Russell et al,
> >
> > I'm happy to take this patch through the clock tree (where the problem
> > shows up) with an ack.
>
> It's not up to me - I don't maintain this driver. I'm just an interested
> party.
Sure.
>
> Note that much more than just this has now broken. The iMX6 code has
> broken as well, and it's not going to take such a simple fix there to
> fix it either.
>
> Please either revert the patches creating this breakage (and have another
> attempt at the next merge window) or supply fixes for these places.
Let's try the latter. Stephen used coccinelle to find similar instances
of clk pointer comparisons[0]. As a stop-gap solution we can introduce a
clk_is_match(struct clk *a, struct clk *b) function and sub it for the
handful of drivers that do this behavior and use CCF.
[0] http://lkml.kernel.org/r/<54E3BA20.3080205@codeaurora.org>
Regards,
Mike
>
> --
> FTTC broadband for 0.8mile line: currently at 10.5Mbps down 400kbps up
> according to speedtest.net.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-02-25 2:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <1422011024-32283-1-git-send-email-tomeu.vizoso@collabora.com>
2015-01-23 11:03 ` [PATCH v13 3/6] clk: Make clk API return per-user struct clk instances Tomeu Vizoso
2015-02-01 21:24 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-02 17:04 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-02 17:32 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-02 19:32 ` Tero Kristo
2015-02-02 20:44 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-02 22:48 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-02 23:11 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-02 22:41 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-02 22:52 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-03 7:03 ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-02-03 8:46 ` Tero Kristo
2015-02-03 15:22 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-02 20:45 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-02 21:31 ` Julia Lawall
2015-02-02 22:35 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-02 22:50 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-03 16:04 ` [Cocci] " Quentin Lambert
2015-02-04 23:26 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-05 15:45 ` Quentin Lambert
2015-02-05 16:02 ` Quentin Lambert
2015-02-06 1:49 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-06 2:15 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-06 9:01 ` Quentin Lambert
2015-02-06 9:12 ` Julia Lawall
2015-02-06 17:15 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-17 22:01 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-03-12 17:20 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2015-03-12 19:43 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-03-13 3:29 ` Shawn Guo
2015-03-13 8:20 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2015-03-13 13:42 ` Shawn Guo
2015-03-13 17:42 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-05 19:44 ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2015-02-05 20:06 ` Sylwester Nawrocki
2015-02-05 20:07 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-05 22:14 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-06 0:42 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-06 1:35 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-06 13:39 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-06 19:30 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-06 19:37 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-06 19:41 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-02-19 21:32 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-24 14:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-25 2:18 ` Mike Turquette [this message]
2015-01-23 11:03 ` [PATCH v13 4/6] clk: Add rate constraints to clocks Tomeu Vizoso
2015-01-29 13:31 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-01-29 19:13 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-01-31 1:31 ` Stephen Boyd
2015-01-31 18:36 ` Tomeu Vizoso
2015-02-01 22:18 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-02 7:59 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2015-02-02 16:12 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-02 17:46 ` Mike Turquette
2015-02-02 17:49 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2015-02-02 19:21 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-02-02 20:47 ` Tony Lindgren
2015-01-23 11:03 ` [PATCH v13 5/6] clkdev: Export clk_register_clkdev Tomeu Vizoso
2015-02-03 17:35 ` Andy Shevchenko
2015-02-03 17:43 ` Andy Shevchenko
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=20150225021800.421.95142@quantum \
--to=mturquette@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@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).