From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: javier@osg.samsung.com (Javier Martinez Canillas)
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 15:31:08 -0400
Subject: [RFC 00/17] clk: Add per-controller locks to fix deadlocks
In-Reply-To: <1471354514-24224-1-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
References: <1471354514-24224-1-git-send-email-k.kozlowski@samsung.com>
Message-ID: <8519a1cf-ec51-2914-e4aa-27b26b9233de@osg.samsung.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

Hello Krzysztof,

On 08/16/2016 09:34 AM, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> RFC, please, do not apply, maybe except patch #1 which is harmless.
> 
> 
> Introduction
> ============
> The patchset brings new entity: clock controller representing a hardware
> block.  The clock controller comes with its own prepare lock which
> is used then in many places.  The idea is to fix the deadlock mentioned
> in commit 10ff4c5239a1 ("i2c: exynos5: Fix possible ABBA deadlock by keeping
> I2C clock prepared") and commit 34e81ad5f0b6 ("i2c: s3c2410: fix ABBA deadlock
> by keeping clock prepared").
> 
> 

I'm not familiar enough with the common clock framework to do a proper review
of this patch-set, but I've tested both on an Exynos5800 Peach Pi Chromebook
and an Exynos5422 Odroid XU4 board and I didn't find any clock regressions.

Also, I confirmed that the possible deadlock in the Odroid XU4 that was fixed
by reverted commit 10ff4c5239a1 doesn't happen anymore with your patches.

Tested-by: Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@osg.samsung.com>

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Open Source Group
Samsung Research America