From: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com>
To: <linux-clk@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-spi@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux@arm.linux.org.uk>, <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
<sboyd@codeaurora.org>, <broonie@kernel.org>, <wsa@the-dreams.de>
Subject: Re: Handling clocks on external busses
Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2015 12:58:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151202125855.GB6058@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151124173718.GK18889@ck-lbox>
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 05:37:18PM +0000, Charles Keepax wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When a clock driver is controlling a clock that is controlled
> over I2C / SPI, we need to perform a write on that bus to enable
> the clock. However, such busses often have their own clocks that
> must be enabled. Since all clock prepares are controlled under
> one large mutex this easily causes deadlock. The device is
> waiting for the I2C / SPI write to complete and the I2C / SPI
> driver is waiting for the clock prepare lock to be released so it
> can enable its own clock.
>
> I have had a bit of a search and it seems the only really advice
> kicking about is that all I2C / SPI drivers should leave the
> clock prepared all the time. Is that intended to be the long term
> solution, should I treat not leaving the clock prepared as a bug?
>
> Thanks,
> Charles
Adding a few more people for visibility.
So after a bit more digging it seems this has been mitigated slightly
as a lot of SPI driver have been updated to execute transfers in
thread rather than from a worker thread and it seems the clock
framework lets you re-enter the locked sections if called from the
same thread.
I am looking at moving some (in mainline) clocking code into an actual
clocking driver (for a SPI/I2C audio CODEC) but I am rather nervous
about this causing problems for customers with random deadlocks.
I guess the naive solution looks like individual locks per clock, but
from what I have been able to google it looks like there are some
challenges with that approach, does anyone have any links to previous
discussions on that? And any suggestions on how I might approach
this?
Thanks,
Charles
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-12-02 12:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-24 17:37 Handling clocks on external busses Charles Keepax
2015-12-02 12:58 ` Charles Keepax [this message]
2015-12-02 13:30 ` Mark Brown
2016-04-04 9:57 ` Charles Keepax
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=20151202125855.GB6058@localhost.localdomain \
--to=ckeepax@opensource.wolfsonmicro.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-clk@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-i2c@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-spi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=mturquette@baylibre.com \
--cc=sboyd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=wsa@the-dreams.de \
/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