From: b.zolnierkie@samsung.com (Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] usb: dwc3-exynos fix unspecified suspend clk error handling
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:05:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8784459.rxWqZlDLVg@amdc3058> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3a113696-d0cd-8944-4acd-c87646fbee15@osg.samsung.com>
Hi,
On Tuesday, January 10, 2017 07:36:35 AM Shuah Khan wrote:
> On 01/10/2017 07:16 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:
> > On 01/10/2017 05:05 AM, Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> On Monday, January 09, 2017 07:21:31 PM Shuah Khan wrote:
> >>> Fix dwc3_exynos_probe() to call clk_prepare_enable() only when suspend
> >>> clock is specified. Call clk_disable_unprepare() from remove and probe
> >>> error path only when susp_clk has been set from remove and probe error
> >>> paths.
> >>
> >> It is legal to call clk_prepare_enable() and clk_disable_unprepare()
> >> for NULL clock. Also your patch changes susp_clk handling while
> >> leaves axius_clk handling (which also can be NULL) untouched.
> >>
> >> Do you actually see some runtime problem with the current code?
> >>
> >> If not then the patch should probably be dropped.
> >>
> >> Best regards,
> >> --
> >> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
> >> Samsung R&D Institute Poland
> >> Samsung Electronics
> >
> > Hi Bartlomiej,
> >
> > I am seeing the "no suspend clk specified" message in dmesg.
> > After that it sets the exynos->susp_clk = NULL and starts
> > calling clk_prepare_enable(exynos->susp_clk);
> >
> > That can't be good. If you see the logic right above this
> > one for exynos->clk, it returns error and fails the probe.
> > This this case it doesn't, but tries to use null susp_clk.
exynos->susp_clk is optional, exynos->clk is not.
> > I believe this patch is necessary.
>
> Let me clarify this a bit further. Since we already know
> susp_clk is null, with this patch we can avoid extra calls
> to clk_prepare_enable() and clk_disable_unprepare().
>
> One can say, it also adds extra checks, hence I will let you
> decide one way or the other. :)
I would prefer to leave the things as they are currently.
The code in question is not performance sensitive so extra
calls are not a problem. No extra checks means less code.
Also the current code seems to be more in line with the rest
of the kernel.
Best regards,
--
Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
Samsung R&D Institute Poland
Samsung Electronics
> thanks,
> -- Shuah
>
> >
> > thanks,
> > -- Shuah
> >
> >>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
> >>> ---
> >>> drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c | 10 ++++++----
> >>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
> >>> index e27899b..f97a3d7 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/usb/dwc3/dwc3-exynos.c
> >>> @@ -131,8 +131,8 @@ static int dwc3_exynos_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>> if (IS_ERR(exynos->susp_clk)) {
> >>> dev_info(dev, "no suspend clk specified\n");
> >>> exynos->susp_clk = NULL;
> >>> - }
> >>> - clk_prepare_enable(exynos->susp_clk);
> >>> + } else
> >>> + clk_prepare_enable(exynos->susp_clk);
> >>>
> >>> if (of_device_is_compatible(node, "samsung,exynos7-dwusb3")) {
> >>> exynos->axius_clk = devm_clk_get(dev, "usbdrd30_axius_clk");
> >>> @@ -196,7 +196,8 @@ static int dwc3_exynos_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>> regulator_disable(exynos->vdd33);
> >>> err2:
> >>> clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->axius_clk);
> >>> - clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->susp_clk);
> >>> + if (exynos->susp_clk)
> >>> + clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->susp_clk);
> >>> clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->clk);
> >>> return ret;
> >>> }
> >>> @@ -210,7 +211,8 @@ static int dwc3_exynos_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >>> platform_device_unregister(exynos->usb3_phy);
> >>>
> >>> clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->axius_clk);
> >>> - clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->susp_clk);
> >>> + if (exynos->susp_clk)
> >>> + clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->susp_clk);
> >>> clk_disable_unprepare(exynos->clk);
> >>>
> >>> regulator_disable(exynos->vdd33);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-01-10 16:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20170110120605epcas1p1c26f7f90fca4765ab9cc339c51d11347@epcas1p1.samsung.com>
2017-01-10 2:21 ` [PATCH] usb: dwc3-exynos fix unspecified suspend clk error handling Shuah Khan
2017-01-10 11:20 ` Sergei Shtylyov
2017-01-10 14:38 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-10 12:05 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2017-01-10 14:16 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-10 14:36 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-10 16:05 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz [this message]
2017-01-10 16:28 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-10 17:09 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2017-01-10 17:49 ` vivek.gautam at codeaurora.org
2017-01-10 18:25 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2017-01-11 2:43 ` pankaj.dubey
2017-01-10 17:53 ` Anand Moon
2017-01-10 18:03 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2017-01-10 18:23 ` Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz
2017-01-10 18:37 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-10 18:59 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2017-01-10 19:20 ` Shuah Khan
2017-01-10 18:36 ` Anand Moon
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=8784459.rxWqZlDLVg@amdc3058 \
--to=b.zolnierkie@samsung.com \
--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