From: skannan@codeaurora.org (Saravana Kannan)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Locking in the clk API
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2011 23:16:04 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D3932B4.8010904@codeaurora.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110120190822.GK6335@n2100.arm.linux.org.uk>
On 01/20/2011 11:08 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 05:02:55PM +0000, Ben Dooks wrote:
>> If you want to make it so that each low-power mode has to work
>> out what PLLs need to be disabled and then re-enabled makes me
>> want to be sick. Hiding this stuff behind specific implementations
>> is a recipe for disaster.
>
> Why should systems which don't suffer from such problems be prevented
> from gaining power saving from turning off their clocks when devices
> are not being used (eg, the console serial port.)
>
> One solution to your root PLL issue would be to have a separate set of
> enable/disable API calls which get called at setup/release time (or
> whatever you'd like to call it) which can only be called from non-atomic
> context. Maybe clk_prepare() and clk_unprepare(). These functions
> should perform whatever is necessary to ensure that the clock source
> is available for use atomically when clk_enable() is called.
>
> So, in your case, clk_prepare() ensures that the root PLL is enabled,
> clk_unprepare() allows it to be turned off.
>
> In the case of a console driver, clk_prepare() can be called when we
> know the port will be used as a console. clk_enable() is then called
> before writing out the string, and clk_disable() after we've completely
> sent the last character.
>
> This allows the best of both worlds. We now have a clk_enable() which
> can be used to turn the clocks off through the clock tree up to the first
> non-atomic clock, and we also have a way to deal with those which need
> to sleep. So not only do "sleeping clock" implementations become possible
> but these "sleeping clock" implementations also get the opportunity to
> shutdown some of their clock tree with minimal latency for doing so.
This suggestion looked promising till I realized that clk_set_rate()
will still be atomic. clk_set_rate() will need to enable/disable the
PLLs depending on which PLLs the rates are derived from. So, the locking
in clk_prepare/unprepare() still has to be atomic since the "slow stuff"
is shared with clk_set_rate().
IMO, the most workable/flexible suggestion I have seen so far is:
- Having a way to explicitly ask for an atomic clock from clk_get().
That way the driver can decide to fail early during probe or decide to
enable/disable in open/close or if it gets atomic clocks to
enable/disable in atomic context.
- Atomic and sleep-able variants of clk_enable/disable/set_rate. I
personally prefer the existing APIs to be sleep-able and introduce new
atomic variants, but it's not worth the time arguing over that.
Taking one step at a time, do we all at least agree having two variants
of enable/disable/set_rate?
Thanks,
Saravana
--
Sent by an employee of the Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-01-21 7:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 86+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-01-11 2:16 Locking in the clk API Jeremy Kerr
2011-01-11 3:15 ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-11 4:11 ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-01-11 4:54 ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-20 16:32 ` Ben Dooks
2011-01-20 18:57 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 3:43 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-21 9:31 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-11 9:03 ` Sascha Hauer
2011-01-11 9:28 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-11 14:34 ` Pavel Machek
2011-01-20 16:29 ` Ben Dooks
2011-01-20 18:56 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-20 21:30 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-01-21 2:06 ` Dima Zavin
2011-01-21 4:12 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-21 9:32 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-22 1:53 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-22 2:24 ` Colin Cross
2011-01-22 2:56 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-22 9:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-24 19:31 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-21 21:03 ` Dima Zavin
2011-01-21 21:53 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-01-21 22:02 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 22:28 ` Colin Cross
2011-01-21 23:21 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-01-21 23:50 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-01-22 1:35 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-22 2:22 ` Colin Cross
2011-01-21 22:29 ` Nicolas Pitre
2011-01-21 23:28 ` Bryan Huntsman
2011-01-11 9:16 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-11 9:44 ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-01-11 10:13 ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-11 10:30 ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-01-11 12:18 ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-11 13:52 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-11 14:35 ` Jeremy Kerr
2011-01-12 3:25 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-12 7:40 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-12 1:54 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-12 2:25 ` Paul Mundt
2011-01-20 16:57 ` Ben Dooks
2011-01-20 16:53 ` Ben Dooks
2011-01-20 16:40 ` Ben Dooks
2011-01-11 10:39 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-11 10:47 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-11 10:56 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-11 11:15 ` Richard Zhao
2011-01-20 17:02 ` Ben Dooks
2011-01-20 19:08 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 0:09 ` Jassi Brar
2011-01-21 4:47 ` Jassi Brar
2011-01-21 9:39 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-21 10:11 ` Jassi Brar
2011-01-22 4:08 ` Richard Zhao
2011-01-22 5:30 ` Jassi Brar
2011-01-21 7:16 ` Saravana Kannan [this message]
2011-01-21 9:40 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-22 1:47 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-27 4:34 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-27 8:54 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-27 20:30 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-27 20:43 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-27 21:07 ` Alan Cox
2011-01-27 21:11 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-27 21:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-28 3:29 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-28 3:27 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-11 12:11 ` Jassi Brar
2011-01-12 2:56 ` Saravana Kannan
2011-01-12 9:03 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-15 14:02 ` Christer Weinigel
2011-01-15 14:53 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-15 15:03 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-15 15:15 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-15 16:03 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-15 16:21 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-15 16:31 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2011-01-16 6:59 ` Grant Likely
2011-01-15 17:07 ` Christer Weinigel
2011-01-15 17:20 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-15 17:44 ` Christer Weinigel
2011-01-15 20:30 ` Russell King - ARM Linux
2011-01-17 1:19 ` Jeremy Kerr
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=4D3932B4.8010904@codeaurora.org \
--to=skannan@codeaurora.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).